Tag Archives: Foreign Policy

A „TURKEY SHOOT“ FOR ERDOGAN

We all have to be courageous, despite all of this, and defend the freedom of the press and the freedom to information.”

Can Dündar, May 2016 ( a lone voice)

Dündar sentenced GuardianIf any doubts still existed about the allegation that our „churnalists“ have lost their capacity (or will) to think for themselves, the recent reporting about the conviction of two courageous Turkish journalists is the proof that you no longer need a functioning brain to work for the media.

I am referring here to the Guardian but you might pick any other more or less reputable newspaper or TV-News in Europe (including RT), it does not really matter since they all „report“ the same story anyway.

So what are the facts?

  • Two Turkish journalists were sentenced to several years in prison last week
  • One of them is Can Dündar, editor-in-chief of the Turkish daily Cumhuriyet (5 years and 10 month); the other is Erdem Gül, chief of Cumhurriyet’s Ankara bureau (5 years)
  • The court ruled that their crime was: „procuring and revealing state secrets that could harm the security of the state or its domestic or foreign interests“ (both were acquitted on espionage and terrorism charges)
  • The greatest joke of it all is that wannabe Sultan Erdogan joined the trial with the complaint that (reporting the inconvenient truth about a criminal state) amounts to „an attempt to undermine Turkey’s global standing / international reputation“.

If you take a closer look how the Guardian has presented the story  you might note the following:

The last paragraph is supposed to be evidence for the Guardian’s „balanced“ reporting which works like this:

First you mention the „revelations“ of Cumhurriyet which „PURPORTED to show Turkey’s state intelligence agency ferrying weapons into Syria in 2014“. This phrasing implies of course that there is no proof for these allegations. They might or might not be true.

Then you dutifully „report“ what the accused has to say (in this case of course President Erdogan):

Regarding the video, the president has acknowledged that the lorries, which were stopped by Turkish paramilitary forces and police officers en route to the Syrian border, belonged to the intelligence agency, but he said they were CARRYING AID to Turkmen rebels in Syria. Turkmen fighters are battling against the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad, and Isis.“

But this is not quite accurate.

THE CHANGING DENIALS

The fact of the matter is that the official response to the revelations by Cumhurriyet changed several times and this inconsistency is (as every criminal investigator knows) a clear sign that someone is lying.

The Turkish newspaper TODAY’S ZAMAN (English version) reported this on May 31, 2015 (the site has since been shut down – no big surprise):

„Turkish government officials have often provided conflicting accounts on the contents of intercepted Syria-bound trucks.

When the news broke in January 2014 that the Turkish military intercepted three trucks and searched their contents under the order of the lead and district prosecutors in Adana province, the government immediately dismissed the claims that the trucks were carrying arms. Prime Minister Davutoğlu, who was foreign minister at the time of the incident, asserted that the cargo was humanitarian aid destined for the embattled Syrian Turkmens on the other side of the border.

 Then-Prime Minister and now President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said on television programs as well as during his public speeches that the trucks were carrying aid to Turkmens. Then-Interior Minister Efkan Ala also said the aid was for Turkmens and a public statement by MİT also claimed the same.

Testimonials by gendarmerie intelligence officers who were involved in the interception confirmed, however, that the shipment’s destination was not an area that included any Turkmen group. The destination on the Syrian side of the border, as disclosed by the drivers, was often a target of reconnaissance by Turkish military personnel who secured the border.

However, the gendarmes said the area was populated by radical groups including al-Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

Syrian Turkmens also refuted claims that they had received either arms or humanitarian aid from Turkey at the time. Syrian-Turkmen Assembly Vice Chairman Hussein al-Abdullah said in January 2014 that no such trucks arrived from Turkey.

Earlier this month, Yasin Aktay, the AK Party’s deputy chairman responsible for foreign affairs, admitted that the trucks were in fact transporting arms, but said that the receiver was the Free Syrian Army (FSA), which is fighting against the Syrian government, not ISIL.

On the other hand, İbrahim Kalın, spokesman and adviser to President Erdoğan, claimed Turkey has never sent any weaponry to Syria.“

TELEGRAM-STYLE SUMMARY OF STATEMENTS

  • GOVERNMENT (#1): NO ARMS IN TRUCKSONLY „AID“ – FOR TURKMEN TRIBE
  • GOVERNMENT (#2): YES, ARMS IN TRUCKS BUT FOR TURKMEN ONLY (DAVUTOĞLU )
  • GOVERNMENT (#3): YES, ARMS IN TRUCKS BUT FOR FSA ONLY (AK party chairman)
  • GOVERNMENT (#4): NO, NEVER ANY WEAPONS SENT TO SYRIA (Erdogan spokesman)
  • GENDARMERIE (which searched the trucks): DESTINATION OF CARGO AN AREA WHERE NO TURKMEN ARE FOUNDAREA UNDER CONTROL OF  JIHADIS (IS and Al Nusra)
  • TURKMEN LEADER: NO AID OR ARMS RECEIVED AT THAT TIME („NO SUCH TRUCKS ARRIVED“) FROM TURKEY

So the editors of the Guardian conveniently ignored these conflicting  assertions. It makes life as a journalist so much easier.

Besides, the material Cumhurriyet published on May 29 clearly demonstrates that these lorries DID actually CARRY weapons for war (and lots of them): It showed gendarmerie and police officers opening crates on the back of the trucks on the way to Syria in January 2014. The officials first opened cardboard boxes marked as “fragile” and full of antibiotics. But what did they find hidden under those boxes?

According to the paper, the trucks were carrying six steel containers, with 1,000 artillery shells, 50,000 machine gun rounds, 30,000 heavy machine gun rounds and 1,000 mortar shells. The arms were reportedly delivered to extremist groups fighting against the Syrian government of President Bashar Assad, whom Ankara wants ousted from power.“ (Source: RT)

How did the Erdogan Government react to the „accusation“? (sending weapons to brutal Jihadis in Syria)

 „The Turkish government has vehemently denied claims that it is arming rebels fighting in Syria and accused dozens of prosecutors, soldiers and security officers involved in searching the trucks of attempting to bring it down through such claims.

[Why is the stigma-word „crazy conspiracy theory“ not used for Erdogan here when it is perfectly applicable ?]

Turkey accused of arms smuggling  to Syria

 Earlier this month, Turkey arrested four prosecutors who ordered the search of the vehicles near the Syrian border in January 2014 and they are now in prison pending trial.

 More than 30 security officers involved in the interception also face charges including military espionage and attempting to overthrow the government. The footage published on the opposition Cumhuriyet daily’s website on Friday shows inspectors searching a metallic container watched by security officers, a prosecutor and sniffer dogs.“ (Daily Mail)

Sultan ErdoganThat the megalomaniac Erdogan („a great friend“ of the US according to Joe Biden) would harass journalists who exposed his crimes comes as no surprise.  That the abuse of power of this narcissistic wannabe „Sultan“ goes so far that even prosecutors and police officers will be gagged and threatened with ridiculous charges is even more scandalous  but apparently our press does not care …(they just focus on the journalists).

THERE IS MASSIVE EVIDENCE FOR TURKEYS ROLE IN SUPPORTING TERRORIST GANGS IN SYRIA

Two reports from German media  (2014) show that hundreds of lorries cross the border between Turkey and Syria every day and a truck driver confirmed: „most of the freight here does go to the regions under IS control“ („to Ahmed in Raqqa“). Conclusion of the German journalists:  „It seems Islamic state does not have to worry about its supply lines“ (Deutsche Welle).

The second video clip (How Turkey arms and sends Wahabi Jihadis to Syria) is even more explicit, among its key findings:

Turkish locals confirm that their government provides medical treatment for the Jihadis, allows them to enter Syria freely, and that there are direct weapons deliveries to Syria

  • Turkish opposition in parlament also condemns Erdogan for „bringing thousands of foreign fighters from 40 countries to Syria“. (Erdogan’s response : „Spreading lies will be punished“)
  • „German soldiers are there (with Patriot missiles – in the meantime they have been removed) to protect a state* which is fuelling the conflict in Syria.“ Does the German government know this? (Of course, they do … Sykes-Picot 2.0 has apparently become Sykes-Merkel-Picot)
  • ( * the „analysis“ of Turkey’s intention by the ICC shown in the video is BS as was the absurd notion that the aggressor Turkey needs protection from Syria  )

There are hundreds of other reports corroborating the „allegation“  that Turkey plays a key role in supporting Al Nusra, IS and other artificial Jihadis (see LINKS at the end of this article) so the material Cumhurriyet published fits perfectly into this political context.

BidenEven Vice-President Joe Biden confirmed in his Harvard speech (lamenting the problems with US-allies in the region)  that „his great friends“ in Turkey (aided and abetted by the insufferable Saudis and of course with Washington „leading -to the slaughter- from behind“)

were so determined to take down Assad and essentially have a proxy Sunni-Shia war – what did they do?“

They poured hundreds of millions of dollars and tens, THOUSANDS OF TONS OF WEAPONS into anyone who would fight gainst Assad — except THAT THE PEOPLE WHO WERE BEING SUPPLIED, WERE AL-NUSRA, AND AL-QAEDA, and the extremist elements of jihadis who were coming from other parts of the world.“

So there is no doubt at all that the „allegations“ of Cumhurriyet are in fact revelations based on facts.  Are our journalists suffering from political autism or do they just not care? (People are dying because the press covers-up for crimes against humanity in Syria, Yemen, Iraq, etc.)

Even more bizarre is the zigzag line of argumentation used by Erdogan to justify his crackdown on the two journalists who are not under his control:

  • „Slander“: claim that footage and information published by Dündar are „not factual“: „fabricated evidence
  • Illegitimate operation against the MIT“ = espionage and „violating confidentiality“ (!)
  • Clandestine collaboration with (former ally and CIA protegé) Fetullah Gülen to „create the impression“ that Turkey helps terrorist organisations
  • Original charges: Espionage and Treason

„The Turkish authorities denied the allegations, saying that the trucks were carrying aid to Syrian ethnic Turkmen tribespeople and labeled their interception an act of “treason” and “espionage“. (RT)

This is of course practically the same silly „refutation“ the Guardian published as context for the recent verdict (see my comments above). But if the trucks carried only „aid“ why is there a need for secrecy?

And if the evidence is allegedly „fabricated“ (the original claim by Erdogan and the state prosecutor in Istanbul) then how can you justify a verdict of „revealing a state secret“?

The fact that members of the local gendarmerie (who had been involved in the operation and were therefore eyewitnesses) were also charged with „espionage“ and even four district attorneys were deposed (put into custody) to stop any independent investigation in Adana province tells the whole story …(What has happened to them? Does anybody care?) …

Turkey IS flagsIn fact everybody with half a brain (and basic knowledge of geopolitics) has figured out by now that Turkey DOES support “Islamist” terror-gangs (not only) in Syria (Russia has provided additional evidence) but the Guardian editors prefer to look the other way. This shameful behaviour by our journalists is not new  and one could rant for hours about it but my point here is the following:

If you use basic logic you will see that the verdict actually PROVES that the story Cumhurriyet published is TRUE. Why?

By charging them for „revealing state secrets“ they inadvertently admit that the story about transporting weapons  clandestinely to Syria  (under the protection of the MIT, Turkish intelligence and under the guise of „humanitarian relief“ ) must be true.

This is precisely  the „state secret“ the world was not supposed to know.

If the lorries had only transported „aid“ then how could that be a „state secret“ in the first place? The whole thing is completely absurd.

Turkeys Killing Machine synthetic Gladio terror(On the criminal role of the MIT  (a creature of the CIA) and the „Gladio“ context see this article and  Daniele Ganser)

In order to divert attention from this logical conclusion the Erdogan cabal arranged for a „shooting“ outside the court shortly before the verdict was announced.

This way they could be sure that all „news“ would concentrate on the spectacular violent event instead of understanding what the verdict really confirmed: the guilt of the Erdogan government as a major supporter of terrorist gangs in Syria.

So wordings like these are no longer justified

The journalists were prosecuted over a report ALLEGING Turkey had tried to ship arms to Islamists in Syria.“ (CPJ)

The case, which is widely viewed as a test for press freedom in Turkey, relates to the pair’s reports on ALLEGED government arms smuggling to Syria.“ (AP

but  the „churnalists“ use them because they do not have the courage to print the truth while lamenting the loss of „press freedom“ in Turkey.

They do not have the guts to show real solidarity with Cumhuriyet journalists by insisting on the truth (although they do not have to go to jail for it).

It makes you sick.

Press freedom

LINKS to more Information about

  1. Erdogan’s autocratic rule

2. The criminal role of Turkey in the destruction of Syria

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/business/2013/09/syria-factories-dismantled-resold-turkey.html

https://youtu.be/uOSUh87WA20 (Plundering Syrian factories)

through artifical „Islamist“ terror  (the ludicrous distinction between „moderate rebels“ and the head-choppers is of course a complete farce):

EXKLUSIVE: Secret Turkish Nerve Center leads aid to Syria rebels

NATO member Turkey harboring Terrorists

 “Most of the fighters who joined us in the beginning of the war came via Turkey, and so did our equipment and supplies.”

ISIS-Commander to Washington Post, August 2014; here is an excerpt from this article:

 REYHANLI, Turkey — Before their blitz into Iraq earned them the title of the Middle East’s most feared insurgency, the jihadists of the Islamic State treated this Turkish town near the Syrian border as their own personal shopping mall.

And eager to aid any and all enemies of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Turkey rolled out the red carpet.

In dusty market stalls, among the baklava shops and kebab stands, locals talk of Islamist fighters openly stocking up on uniforms and the latest Samsung smartphones. Wounded jihadists from the Islamic State and the al-Nusra Front — an al-Qaeda offshoot also fighting the Syrian government — were treated at Turkish hospitals. Most important, the Turks winked as Reyhanli and other Turkish towns became way stations for moving foreign fighters and arms across the border.”

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/michaelweiss/100159613/syrian-rebels-say-turkey-is-arming-and-training-them/

 

(Next: Part 2 of „What is Zionism“?)

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Europe, Foreign Policy, Politics, Uncategorized

when words become weapons

(A plea of “Not guilty”for Ken Livingstone)

Myths Rose„Zionism“ is a word that is never mentioned in the German media  but „Anti-Semitism“ is always present in the public domain, like an invisible landmine, ready to be used against people who tread the forbidden path (defending Palestinian rights and seeking justice based on „clinging to truth“, a basic principle of Gandhi in his resistance against British rule).

The sordid history of Zionism (supposedly an emancipatory movement striving for freedom and self-determination of Jews in a “national home”), how it signed up to Western imperialism , its core elements of racism and religious superstition,  is constantly being blacked out, erased from our minds.

Anybody daring to mention the collaboration between Zionists and Hitler’s Third Reich will get hammered by the Thought-Police and our fawning media is happy to help them with the job.

HOW “ANTI-SEMITIC” IS THE LABOUR PARTY?  (wrong question)

A shocking example for this is the recent treatment Ken Livingstone received from David Mellor on LBC Radio who treated him like a naughty child and demanded repeatedly an apology for mentioning Hitler and Zionism in the same breath.

The British media immediately joined the Zionist bandwagon by doing nothing to question the claim of “antisemitism” , calling Livingstone’s words “inflammatory” and  agreeing that the Labour party has been “tainted” by his remarks.

Greenslade on Livingstone Apparently fuelled by moral indignation and the illusion of intellectual superiority, Roy Greenslade  (a professor of journalism!) wrote a scathing comment in The Guardian:

“Has Ken Livingstone lost the plot? Can he not see that what he said about Hitler and Zionism was utterly barmy? Does he not realise that his remarks were an historical nonsense?”

No Sir, Ken Livingstone has not „lost it“ and his remarks were not „historical nonsense“ either.  He did not say that Hitler was a Zionist but meant that Nazi-Germany and Zionism had overlapping interests which may sound shocking but is no surprise for those who stick to the historical facts.

I think the man deserves a lot of respect for having the guts to stand up for the (forbidden) truth even if  the British fawning media (while enabling mass murder in Syria, Yemen and Iraq) come down on him like a ton of bricks.

Why should anyone be sorry “for mentioning Hitler”?  Because “he is such a toxic person”? This is the most absurd notion I have heard on public radio.

 I’m not going to apologise for telling the truth“  (Ken Livingstone on LBC Radio)

Instead of checking what the historical facts about the relation between Zionism and the Third Reich really are, the “churnalists” eagerly focus on the “anti-semitic” label and how it will damage Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party, knowing full-well that Livingstone’s claim  about a „well-orchestrated campaign by the Israel lobby to smear anybody who criticises Israel policy as antisemitic” is true.

 „You are a disgusting racist, a Nazi apologist…“.

(John Mann reprimanding Ken Livingstone in front of a film crew which “happened” to be there …)

This heavily publicized display of moral outrage (staged by Labour MP John Mann for “bringing the party into disrepute”) against Ken Livingstone was even more proof of how subservient British politicians have become to Zionism and the quasi-fascist Israeli government.

Claiming Hitler was a Zionist is not only a huge historical perversion, but it directly equates Nazism and Zionism. It suggests they share objectives and values; it is guilt by association. It is hard to think of a more offensive linkage.“

(Rabbi Danny Rich, member of the Labour party, quoted in the Guardian)

Zionism BrennerBut the historical record is clear on this: Yes, the Zionists DID collaborate with Nazi-Germany for their political goals (even when the Holocaust became evident in 1941).  Here are a few examples:

ZIONISM DID NOTHING TO FIGHT FOR THE RIGHTS OF JEWS  (AS EQUAL CITIZENS)

The following statements (excerpts) are from the Zionist federation of Germany, published on June 21, 1933 shortly after Hitler came to power. In it it proposes to help the state with the “solution of the Jewish question” and finds that Nazi-Germany and Zionism have common interests:

ZIONISM  ACCEPTED  THE RACIST  DISCRIMINATION  IN  NAZI-GERMANY (and found it useful)

 “Zionism believes that a rebirth of national life, such as is occuring in Germany through  adhesion to Christian and national values, must also take place in the Jewish national group. For the Jew, too, origin, religion, community of fate and group consciousness must be of decisive significance in the shaping of his life.“

 They offer proposals  “on the regulation of the situation of the Jews in the new German state .. which pave the way for a real solution of the Jewish question that will satisfy the German state. […] We are not concerend with the fate of individual jews who have lost their  economic and social positions as a result of Germany’s profund transformation. […] On the foundation of the new state, which has established the principle of race, we wish so to fit our community into the total structure .. so that for us too, fruitful activity for the Fatherland is possible.” (They go on to say that they believe  in “the bold resoluteness of the new Germany in handling the Jewish question,  in “taking decisive steps toward overcoming the Jewish problem” …)

 Under the header “relationship to the German people” one can read:

 “We, too, are against mixed marriage and are for maintaining the purity of the Jewish group and reject any trespasses of the cultural domain … we believe in the possibility of an honest relationship of loyalty between a group-conscious Jewry and the German state”.

[To this day “mixed marriage” is illegal in Israel as it was under Hitler in Germany …. where is the moral outrage?]

So it should come as no surprise that under “Emigration” we find the following statement:

“For its practical aims, Zionism hopes to be able to win the collaboration even of a government fundamentally hostile to Jews, because in dealing with the Jewish question not sentimentalities are involved but a real problem, whose solution interests all peoples … especially the German people.

 The realization of Zionism could only be hurt by resentment of Jews abroad against the German development. Boycott propaganda (then being carried out in the US) is in essence un-Zionist, because Zionism wants not to do battle …”

 (Yet it was clear from the beginning that the colonization of Palestine was impossible without massive violence against the native Arab population as Vladimir Jabotinsky openly admitted in his “Iron Wall” and as we have now seen for decades.)

They then go on to say that their “solution” to the Jewish question would “entail important advantages for the German people” .. and that the idea of nationhood would “undergo a decisive deepending by a statesmanlike action on the part of the new Germany”.

ZIONISM  CREATES  THE  MYTH  OF  A  JEWISH NATION  (BASED ON  THE BLOOD & SOIL IDEOLOGY OF THE NAZIS)

If the position of the Jews in Germany should be “regulated through recognition of their special character” this would “advance the German principles of nationality”.  The Zionists even go so far as to acknowledge that “the abnormal situation of the Jews” lead to “scarcely tolerable conditions for other peoples” (!).

They end with the hope that the German Government will have “full understanding” for their “clear posture” (regarding the Jewish question) because it “harmonizes with the interests of the [fascist] state”.

At the September 1935 National Socialist Party Congress, the Reichstag adopted the so-called “Nuremberg laws” that prohibited marriages and sexual relations between Jews and Germans and, in effect, proclaimed the Jews an „alien“ minority nationality. A few days later the Zionist Jüdische Rundschau was not outraged but editorially welcomed the new measures:

Germany … is meeting the demands of the World Zionist Congress when it declares the Jews now living in Germany to be a national minority. Once the Jews have been stamped a national minority it is again possible to establish normal relations between the German nation and Jewry. The new laws give the Jewish minority in Germany its own cultural life, its own national life. In future it will be able to shape its own schools, its own theatre, and its own sports associations. In short, it can create its own future in all aspects of national life …“

MILITANT ZIONISTS  OFFER  TO FIGHT  FOR  THE  THIRD  REICH

Stern com stampEven more shocking is a letter from underground Zionist terrorist leader Avraham Stern (received by the German embassy in Ankara) proposing in January 1941 (when the “Endloesung” was already in sight and  the “Stern Gang” now regarded Britain as their main enemy) “the active participation of the NMO [Lehi] in the war on the side of Germany in exchange for Nazi help in creating a “Jewish state.”

Here are the most appalling statements:

The Zionist military leaders acknowledge that  “solving the Jewish question” once and for all  means a “Jew-free” Europe:

However, the only way this can be totally achieved is through settlement of these masses in the homeland of the Jewish people, Palestine, and by the establishment of a Jewish state in its historical boundaries.

The NMO, which is very familiar with the good will of the German Reich government and its officials towards Zionist activities within Germany and the Zionist emigration program, takes that view that:

  1. Common interests can exist between a European New Order based on the German concept and the true national aspirations of the Jewish people as embodied by the NMO.
  2. Cooperation is possible between the New (fascist) Germany and a renewed, folkish-national Jewry [Hebräertum].
  3. The establishment of the historical Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, and bound by treaty with the German Reich, would be in the interest of maintaining and strengthening the future German position of power in the Near East.“ […]

Brenner 51 DocumentsTalk about sucking up to Hitler. For more documents proving Zionist collaboration with the Nazis try these books)

N.B. These Zionists DO NOT CONDEMN the grave injustices the Third Reich imposed on Jews (and political opponents). On the contrary, they see these measures as conducive for their own plans: to “encourage” (even coerce) as many Jews a possible to emigrate to Palestine (thus loading the “Jewish question” on the Palestinian Arabs who were going to suffer extreme injustices for decades as a result).

 “If I knew that it was possible to save all the [Jewish] children of Germany by transporting them to England, but only half of them by transporting them to Palestine, I would choose the second.”

(future Israeli President David Ben-Gurion, quoted by  Israeli historian Tom Segev)

ZIONISM IS OBSESSED WITH CREATING A JEWISH MAJORITY IN PALESTINE (using criminal and immoral means to get there)

But the majority of educated European Jews (especially in the West) did not want to leave their home countries since their national identity was German, French, etc. and they lead  a fairly good life (until the Nazis arrived).  The situation of the Eastern Jews was totally different: many of them lived in poverty, in filthy ghettoes and under the command of the “Talmudic” rabbis who encouraged the segregation from the inferior “goyim”.  These people became the nucleus of “Israel” and even after the Holocaust most Western, liberal Jews wanted to go to the US, not Israel so the Zionists had to use brutal methods of intimidation (and deception) to get the “human material” they needed for their artificial “homeland”.

shadow holocaust GrodzinskyThey infiltrated the DP-camps after the war in order to “persuade” survivors to emigrate to Palestine.  A recruitment campaign in these camps (to get enough fighters for  the planned assault against the Palestinians) resulted in only 0,3 % of  the male DPs as volunteers.  So a compulsory draft was necessary.

 This bizarre project – in which a non-nation state imposed compulsory military service on people who had never even lived in the land for which they were required to fight – was enforced through a number of mechanisms, including publishing black lists of “draft evaders”, firing them from jobs, evicting them from dwellings, withdrawing their food rations, and beating them. These tactics were also at times used on their relatives.”

 (Source: Alison Weir, Against our better Judgement, p. 79  with reference to Grodzinsky: Shadow of the Holocaust – see also the quote below)

This is a shocking affair. Several thousand sick, malnourished, and vulnerable orphans, still at great risk, were forced by the Zionists to stay in the [German] camps, even though arrangements were made for them to arrive to safety in England and France. The rest of this tragedy constitutes chapter 4 of my book.”

They also “retrieved” Jewish children (often against their will, in tears) who had been rescued by compassionate people during the war and put them into orphanages run by the “Jewish Brigade”.  A search for relatives was not allowed to avoid the risk that the children might want to stay in Europe.  They needed to be turned into good little Zionists so they had to learn (and speak only) Hebrew and  internalize the myth of the “promised land”.

WHAT  JEWISH  PEOPLE?

Shlomo Sand InventionAs Shlomo Sand has shown in his book, the idea of a “Jewish people” is a complete fantasy. The ancestors of most “Israelis” (immigrants from Eastern Europe and Russia) were the Khazars, a Mongolian tribe* who collectively converted to Judaism (by decree of its ruler) in the 8th century. They never set foot on the “Holy Land” and had absolutely no connection to biblical “Juda” or “Israel”.

(*Names like “Kagan”, “Kahane” or “Cohen”  are variations of the Mongolian word for ruler: Khan )

ZIONISM IS OBSESSED WITH RACIAL PURITY

Keep that in mind when you read about Jabotinsky’s emphatic insistence on  “preserving racial purity” as an absolute condition for saving “the special, national character” of Jews.  Accoding to  him, this must be done “at all costs” which means (planned) racial segregation and ethnic cleansing are “necessary” so that the “Jewish bloodline” will not be “diluted” by mixed marriages and in order to make “Jews” the majority “race”  in Palestine / Israel.

So we already see, that this is a mirror-image of the “blood and soil” ideology of the Nazis and Hitler did the Zionists a huge favour by fostering the myth that “Jews” are a race when there is only Judaism as a religion. Since Jews are not a “nation”, they do not need a “national home” either. This was just another devilish exercise of “divide et impera”.

ZIONISM IS BASED ON A BIG LIE

The whole thing (“Jewish national integrity” and “spiritual energy” bound to the “promised land”) was completely fabricated and part of a sinister political game which included support for the Nazis and the Bolsheviks by the same power circles  in order to destroy  geo-political rivals Germany and Russia by turning them (twice) against each other.  (Britain’s role in this diabolical game –  see Preparata: Conjuring Hitler)

Opponents of Zionism  fought for the rights of Jews in their different countries but rejected the idea of putting thousands of Jews in a foreign Muslim country, like a dagger into the heart of the Arab world.

Gandhi articulated this attitude in 1938 with the following  words of wisdom:

My sympathy does not blind me to the requirements of justice.The cry for the national home for the Jews does not make much appeal to me. The sanction for it is sought in the Bible and the tenacity with which the Jews have hankered after return to Palestine.

Why should they not, like other peoples of the earth, make that country their home where they are born and where they earn their livelihood? Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct.

The mandates have no sanction but that of the last war. Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home. The nobler course would be to insist on a just treatment of the Jews wherever they are born and bred.”

ZIONISM: THE FORBIDDEN MEMORY (COMPARISON WITH  FASCISM AND HITLER)

By looking at the assessments of contemporary witnesses, who experienced the growing political power of Zionism (especially in the US and Britain), the creation of Israel and who were appalled by the  unscrupulous  behaviour of its leaders, we gain further insight into the true spirit of Zionism:

Sir John Munro Troutbeck (1894-1971), head of the British Middle East Office in Cairo and later ambassador to Iraq, wrote in a letter to Churchill on May 18, 1948 – shortly after the creation of “the state of Israel”:

 “It is difficult not to see that Zionist policy is anything else than unashamed aggression carried out by methods of deceit and brutality not unworthy of Hitler”

Quoted by William Roger Louis in The British Empire in the Middle East 1945-1951, p.576 (1986)

So Ken Livingstone has no reason to apologize for putting Zionism and Nazism in a moral context (not as morally “equal” but as dangerous ideologies with a racist, supremacist core) . Even the most horrific Nazi atrocities cannot and must not serve as a moral fig-leaf for Zionist crimes (committed so soon after the “Holocaust”).

On 2 June 1948, Sir John Troutbeck sent another diplomatic message, this time to the British foreign secretary, Ernest Bevin. In it he complains that

the Americans are responsible for the creation of a gangster state“ headed by “an utterly unscrupulous set of leaders“.

REMORSELESS  ZIONIST TERRORISM: „FREEDOM FIGHTERS“ IN ACTION

Bernadotte murderThe context for these condemnations were of course the numerous attacks committed by Zionist terrorists against British officials:  e.g. the assassination of Lord Moyne in Cairo (November 6, 1944) or the bombing of the King David Hotel in 1946. The assassination of UN-envoy Count Folke Bernadotte in 1948 is perhaps the most despicable political murder the Zionist gangs committed at that time. (Regarding the abominable crimes against the Palestinians – see below)

While the British government and military have not been unfamiliar with terrorist methods for their own purposes, it must be pointed out that the most famous Zionist terrorist „masterminds“ are unique in one respect: they have never been held to account for their crimes and later even became Prime Minister of Israel (Menachim Begin and Yitzak Shamir).

The remains of two Jewish assassins (hanged in 1945 for the murder of Lord Moyne) were brought to Israel in 1975 and received a state funeral with full military honors. They are considered to be national heroes until this day. (No apologies required and demanded by our presstitutes in this case …!)

Why did Churchill support the creation of a „Jewish homeland“ in Palestine? Perhaps this paragraph (written by him and published in 1920) can offer a clue:

 „Of course, Palestine is far too small to accomodate more than a fraction of the Jewish race, nor do the majority of national Jews want to go there (!). But if such a state should come into existence in our lifetime .. an event would have been created … which would … be especially in harmony with the truest interest of the British empire.“

Well, as it turned out, the immorality and cunning of the British Empire was more than matched by the Zionists …

Lord MoyneWinston Churchill was a close friend of Lord Moyne  but at the same time a supporter of the Zionist ambitions in Palestine. So how did the react to the cold-blooded murder in Cairo?

 If our dreams for Zionism are to end in the smoke of the assassin’s pistol and our labors for the future are to produce a new set of gangsters worthy of Nazi Germany, then many like myself would have to reconsider the position we have maintained so consistently and so long in the past. If there is to be any hope of a peaceful and successful future for Zionism, these wicked activities must cease, and those responsible for them must be destroyed root and branch”.

(Quote from an article by Winston Churchill, New York Times, November 18, 1944)

So we must keep all that in mind every time the Israeli government says it cannot negotiate with Hamas or Hezbollah „because they are terrorists“.  (Possible links between „IS“ and Israel need to be further examined ….)

against our better judgement WeirThe web of political intrigue spun by the Zionist organisations entangled more and more US-politicians (being no less dangerous than terror attacks in Palestine)  but they were not visible to the public.  A good primer for understanding the political machinations of Zionists in the US is this book:

Watch the author, the courageous Alison Weir talking about the book in this video:

Today the secrecy is no longer necessary as American current and future „leaders“ have accepted that they must kneel down before AIPAC/  Israel in order to advance their political career. (Just look at Hilary Clinton and try not to throw up …)

DARK FORCES & BLACK HOLES: EINSTEIN EXPOSES THE ZIONIST CRIMES

Albert EinsteinHere is one more contemporary (this time Jewish) 1940s-witness, appalled at the brutality of the Zionist terrorist-gangs whose job was to ethnically cleanse the newly created „Israel“ from the unwanted native Arab population. In their own self-serving language this terror was called  „encourage them to leave“. (Remember this happened only 3 years after the „Holocaust“ had ended and was meticulously planned  by the „chosen people“ …)

Albert Einstein’s (originally a supporter of the Zionist project) famous letter to the New York Times  (published on December 4, 1948 with the support of other prominent Jews) is still highly relevant, especially the exposé of the fascist nature of the Zionist military doctrine and the deception the Likud party practised to hide its true character (represented by Begin then and by Netanyahu now). Here are some excerpts:

TO THE EDITORS OF THE NEW YORK TIMES:

Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the “Freedom Party” (Tnuat Ha Herut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties.  It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine.

Several Americans of national repute have lent their names to welcome his visit.  It is inconceivable that those who oppose fascism throughout the world, if correctly informed as to Mr. Begin’s political record and perspectives, could add their names and support to the movement he represents.

[…] The public avowels of Mr. Begin’s party are no guide whatever to its actual character. Today they speak of freedom, democracy and anti-imperialism, whereas until recently they openly preached the doctrine of the Fascist state.  It is in its actions that the terrorist party betrays its real character; from its past actions we can judge what it may be expected to do in the future.

The Deir Yassin incident exemplifies the character and actions of theFreedom Party“

A shocking example was their behavior in the Arab village of Deir Yassin.  This village, off the main roads and surrounded by Jewish lands, had taken no part in the war, and had even fought off Arab bands who wanted to use the village as their base.  On April 9 (THE NEW YORK TIMES), terrorist bands attacked this peaceful village, which was not a military objective in the fighting, killed most of its inhabitants—240 men, women, and children—and kept a few of them alive to parade as captives through the streets of Jerusalem.  Most of the Jewish community was horrified at the deed, and the Jewish Agency sent a telegram of apology to King Abdullah of Trans-Jordan.  But the terrorists, far from being ashamed of their act, were proud of this massacre, publicized it widely, and invited all the foreign correspondents present in the country to view the heaped corpses and the general havoc at Deir Yassin.

[A more detailed description of the Zionist crimes and schemes in Palestine during the 1930s and 40s can be found in Ilan Pappe’s excellent historical analysis: THE ETHNIC CLEANSING OF PALESTINE].

Within the Jewish community they have preached an admixture of  ultranationalism, religious mysticism, and racial superiority.  [this could also serve a description of the NSDAP in the 1930s…]

Like other Fascist parties they have been used to break strikes, and have themselves pressed for the destruction of free trade unions.  In their stead they have proposed corporate unions on the Italian Fascist model.

[ZIONISTS ALSO USE TERROR-METHODS AGAINST NON-COMPLIANT JEWS]

During the last years of sporadic anti-British violence, the IZL and Stern groups inaugurated a reign of terror in the Palestine Jewish community.  Teachers were beaten up for speaking against them, adults were shot for not letting their children join them.  By gangster methods, beatings, window-smashing, and wide-spread robberies, the terrorists intimidated the population and exacted a heavy tribute.  

[…]

It is inconceivable that those who oppose fascism throughout the world, if correctly informed about Mr.Begins political record, could lend their names and support to the movements he represents. Before irreparable damage [..] is done,… and the creation of the impression in Palestine that a large segment of America support fascist elements in Israel, the American public must be informed as to the record and objective of Mr. Begin and his government.

The discrepancies between the bold claims now being made by Begin and his party, and their record of past performance in Palestine bear the imprint of no ordinary political party.  This is the unmistakable stamp of a Fascist party for whom terrorism (against Jews, Arabs, and British alike), and misrepresentation are means, and a “Leader State” is the goal. “

(Einstein was supposed to become the second president of Israel but said No, thanks ….)

CONFESSIONS IN A DIARY

The first foreign minister of Israel, Moshe Sharett was often shaken by the ruthlessness of the military establishment and worried about the moral deterioration in Israeli society in the 1950s. Here are just a few observations from his diary:

“… the long chain of false incidents and hostilities we have invented, and so many clashes we have provoked ….

“… the narrow-mindedness and short-sightedness of our military leaders” [who] “seem to presume that the State of Israel may-or even must-behave in the realm of international relations according to the laws of the jungle.”

Source:Israel’s Sacred Terrorism

The picture that emerges, is of an Israel wantonly inflicting every possible measure of death and anguish on civilian populations in a mood reminiscent of regimes which neither Mr. Begin nor I would dare to mention by name.”

Source: Israel’s UN Ambassador and Foreign Minister Abba Eban in 1981, cited in Edward Herman, The Real Terror Network, 1982), p. 77.

FASCIST ROOTS DO NOT GO AWAY

Avi Shlaim 2009In January 2009 (when Gaza was suffering under „Operation“ Cast Lead)  the Guardian published an important article by Professor Avi Shlaim which is still worth reading because it exposes the lies, falsification of history and moral hypocrisy of the Israeli government. Here are some very revealing passages:

(Shlaim also uses the “gangster state” quote mentioned above and states that he no longer considers it a „too harsh“ judgement on Israel)

[…] „Israel likes to portray itself as an island of democracy in a sea of authoritarianism. Yet Israel has never in its entire history done anything to promote democracy on the Arab side and has done a great deal to undermine it. Israel has a long history of secret collaboration with reactionary Arab regimes to suppress Palestinian nationalism. Despite all the handicaps, the Palestinian people succeeded in building the only genuine democracy in the Arab world with the possible exception of Lebanon. In January 2006, free and fair elections for the Legislative Council of the Palestinian Authority brought to power a Hamas-led government. Israel, however, refused to recognise the democratically elected government, claiming that Hamas is purely and simply a terrorist organisation.“

[…] „The brutality of Israel’s soldiers is fully matched by the mendacity of its spokesmen. Eight months before launching the current war on Gaza, Israel established a National Information Directorate. The core messages of this directorate to the media are that Hamas broke the ceasefire agreements; that Israel’s objective is the defence of its population; and that Israel’s forces are taking the utmost care not to hurt innocent civilians. Israel’s spin doctors have been remarkably successful in getting this message across. But, in essence, their propaganda is a pack of lies.“

How is it possible that the whole history of a state and its dangerous core ideology  become “a pack of lies” that persists for decades?

(Our journalists know the answer …)

THE  SHADY ROLE OF BRITAIN

Considering that it was the British government  that had issued the “Balfour Declaration” in the first place which enabled the Zionists to claim Palestine as their phony “homeland”, that deranged British military officers (like Orde Wingate) trained the Zionist fighters in what can only be considered terrorist methods against civilians, and that it was Britain that betrayed both the Arabs and the Jews (with false promises), the one-sided accusation against the US (“creating a gangster state in Israel” – though not unfounded) can only be regarded as the result of “selective historical amnesia”.

So when PM David Cameron today puts on a show of moral indignation about the “anti-semitism” of the Labour Party he obviously suffers from the same mental affliction:  ignoring Britain’s (Dr. Frankenstein) role in creating the Zionist monster …

 

Coming Soon – Part 2:   WHAT IS WRONG WITH ZIONISM?

“I will never forgive the Arabs for FORCING US to kill them.  (Golda Meir)

 To understand the endless controversy of Israel it is inevitable to examine what Zionism really is (from a psychological perspective) and how the label “Anti-Semitism” is being used to stigmatize and ostracize critics of the Israeli state to avoid any real public debate about the moral bankruptcy of its leaders …

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Uncategorized

Greece for Sale

the new fascist dealThis piece (not all of it, the parts about the Nazi roots of the “European Economic Union” and the quotes from William Blum were not included) was originally written as a reply to the article Yanis Varoufakis published in the German Newspaper DIE ZEIT and which he also presented on his blog in English.

I posted it yesterday in the comment section of his blog but it was completely censored, it simply ‘disappeared’. I wonder why ….

My first question was:

If “Grexit” was the alpha and omega of the German Euro-strategy then why did they give it up in the end?

Yanis, I respect your intellectual honesty very much but I think you have been hoodwinked to believe that “Grexit” was planned all along. They knew perfectly well that Syriza wanted to stay in the EMU (apparently) at any cost (as a matter of national honour) so they

had no incentive to give any ground at all. They can continue to make demands, no matter how unreasonable, with no possible political recourse on the part of Syriza. Hence all Greeks .. [became] prisoners of the Eurozone.” (quote from Andrew Ryder).

It was all a huge Machiavellian bluff, a kind of “psyop”: by showing you the “Schäuble-Plan” they instilled fear (also in the other deficit countries) (like the Holy Officium torturers knew that in some cases just showing the victim the gruesome torture tools was enough for a heretic to “recant” or “confess”)and if that was not enough, they counted on another psychological effect: Schäuble’s ostensible determination to “kick Greece out” of the Eurozone (for which there is NO LEGAL basis) would provoke the desired reaction: after accepting the Troika’s draconian, dictatorial terms, PM Tsipras could cling to the somewhat consoling notion that Syriza had at least “foiled” Germany’s humiliating plan.

At the same time the Greek people were subjected to even more economic “shock treatment” (by cutting off liquidity to the Greek banks) and the ultimate humiliation: after the great “OXI”-vote (which gave them for a brief moment a glimmer of hope) “their” government accepted even harsher terms than originally presented by the Troika: Greece is now effectively FOR SALE (at bargain prices …). The message to all left parties (and their voters) in all of Europe is clear:

IT DOES NOT MATTER AT ALL.

You can vote … but you cannot decide …

The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations.     Carroll Quigley

 

blum killing hopeIn his book „Killing Hope” William Blum writes about Greece after the US had taken charge (since Britain could no longer afford the cost of neo-colonialism) in 1947. Here are three telling excerpts:

Blum Killing Hope GREECE

The “request” for aid  was written by the State Department but presented to the world as reflecting the wishes of the Greek government:

2 US aid to Greece 1950s

Blum also quotes from a letter to the director of the US “aid-program” in Greece (AMAG), written by then Secretary of State, George Marshall  in 1947 offering the following advice:

3 US aid to Greece 1950s

Talk about the arrogance of power. Today, the unholy “Troika” does not even bother to camouflage the economic dictatorship they impose on Greece since they control the financial weapons as well as public opinion.

We know that during the Cold War the Anglo-American imperial ruling class stopped at nothing to prevent a (coalition) government with a socialist or communist party (and who knows this better than Greeks …UK/US-assisted fascist take-over in 1944, 1967, then the corrupt, US-trained PASOK puppets …etc.) in Western Europe, including NATO-supported terrorism (see “Gladio). This is no longer necessary since the neoliberal, totalitarian economic “ThinkPol” has succeeded in brainwashing European political leaders and journalists to accept the “TINA”-principle. They realize of course that the huge inequality this system produces will generate opposition, even rebellion but the tyranny of finance* has now reached such a stage that resistance seems futile (at least in the Eurozone).

*excerpt: “I had had the opportunity to hear Mr Alexandre Lamfallusy, the leading technocrat tasked with the introduction of the single currency, speak in Tokyo around 1996. He presented his road map. The astonishing aspect was the level of detail. He told us, years in advance, in which European cities the chiefs of central banks and the finance ministers would meet and WHAT THEY WOULD DECIDE; when and where their deputies would meet and WHAT THEY WOULD DECIDE; and where and when the heads of government would meet, and WHAT THEY WOULD DECIDE: month after month of detailed scheduled meetings, with a complete script of pre-ordained outcomes, named after the cities in which the meetings were to take place. His confident presentation made it clear that he expected this script to be followed to the letter. I saw no reason to doubt his words. (Needless to mention, this is what happened).”

(Back to my questions for Yanis Varoufakis): What I do not understand is this: You know perfectly well that the whole design of the Eurozone is crazy (economically unviable) and I am sure that you are aware of the spot-on warnings of Wynne Godley in 1992:

[…] “the power to issue its own money, to make drafts on its own central bank, is the main thing which defines national independence. If a country gives up or loses this power, it acquires the status of a local authority or colony.”

cartoon 2In several interviews I heard you say that the Euro is doomed if no structural reforms are undertaken (and you know they will not come since Germany is not even willing to confront the question let alone change a system (apparently) to its advantage) then why did you support Syriza’s plan to stay in the EMU as Minister of Finance? Why throw away your pride (as a nation and in your case as a brilliant scholar), give up your sovereignty to keep your place on the Titanic? Why did Syriza not explain to the Greek public what the Euro really is (an instrument of political subjugation)?

Einstein once quipped that

‘You cannot solve a problem with the same way of thinking that created it in the first place’.

The (German) idea that you have “to discipline” European governments with the “threat” of being kicked out of the Eurozone (for which there is NO LEGAL basis) to make the stupid fiscal union work is a perfect embodiment of this insight and shows that we are ruled by “idiots”, [Ιδιώτης / idiotikos: “unprofessional, unskilled; not done by rules of art] not intellectually mature people who really engage in politics for the community [democrates].

Hitlers ShadowThe bitter truth is, the EU never was a truly democratic project, in fact its origins can be traced back to the Third Reich “Großraumwirtschaft”. The incredible irony is, that although these plans were based on dictatorial Germany calling the economic shots (with the “Reichsmark” having the hegemonic position the dollar has today and Berlin replacing London as the financial centre), the economic planning was a lot more intelligent and socially just than the Maastricht regime – here are some major points (taken from the book The Tainted Source by John Laughland):

(See also this – 1942: Conference on the European Economic Community)

  • Labour instead of capital must be the economic yardstick.
  • Prices are no longer the regulator of all economic phenomena. Instead, prices are regulated by the state according to the needs of the collectivity (!). (Ferdinand Fried, Professor of Economics)
  • The need for an integrated European clearing-system (regarding the balance of payments) was clearly identified.
  • Primacy should not be accorded to the exchange rate, instead full employment and purchasing power stability should be the primary goals of currency management … (Dr. Bernhard Benning / The State Theory of Money)
  • Walter Funk was defending the need for state control of foreign exchange to prevent uncontrollable capital flows from disturbing the economy; He realized that in order to establish the greatest possible degree of economic and political autarky, a monetary regime would have to be set up to protect Europe from “uncontrollable international” influences that “could be used as power-political instruments to suppress us
  • To maintain currency stability, price controls and the control of credit (!) were considered necess British commentators criticized the German “hostility to the Gold standard” (and for good reason…), called their ideas “totalitarian” as opposed to economic “liberalism”, the “free-market”-scam, etc.

Well, by now we should realize that nothing is more “totalitarian” than neo-liberalism (with the “market” as cover for plutocratic rule by bankers and their rich clients)

  • Gold became irrelevant once prices were determined not by the market but by governments which regulated all economic activity and once trade was managed through clearing arrangements.
  • Francis Delaisi, an ardent opponent of the gold standard, hated “the reign of money” and was convinced that the economic history of Europe after 1918 had shown the capitalist system to be on the verge of collapse. He rightly argued that the explosion of credit between 1919-29 in the US had led to the crash of 1929, and that the consequent depression had brought massive unemployment in the Anglo-Saxon economies. This threatened to destroy the entire social structure in Europe. (sound familiar?)
  • In Delaisi’s view the gold standard restricted social progress, because (being a world currency), it opened labour markets to world competition and thereby forced down wages .. he considered it to be an “instrument of inhumane competition”. It was important to liberate producers from the competition of exotic countries whose standard of living was too low … (Hitler abolished the gold-standard as soon as he came to power).
  • Capitalism is a political system based on class interests triumphing over those of the community as a whole.

(I never understood where the “socialist” part (in National-Socialist) came from – how could an extreme right, fascist, corporate-friendly party be ‘socialist’ at the same time? Now I get the picture …)

To be clear: I am not endorsing far-right parties here at all but I want to make the point that the rule of “the free market” (serving as a cover for the financial aristocracy) is no less authoritarian than what the Nazis had planned, it is a totalitarian system – just look at what is happening in Greece. There is no ‘agreement’ here, this was pure mafia-style coercion (a ‘reverse Corleone’ someone called it): accept or bury your economy.

So it seems they took the fascist plan for a European “Union”, got rid of the “socialist” part (commanded by the state) and replaced it with the totalitarian market-regime (still favouring Berlin). Dictatorial economic “rules” that must be adhered to – at all cost – (some are more equal here than others as we have seen, since Germany and France were the first countries to violate the Maastricht rules but no ‘punishment’ was meted out to them) should evoke huge resistance but presenting these rules as “necessary” adjustments to which there is no alternative (except economic isolation and bankruptcy) has succeeded in blaming the victims for the crime … the “market” has become the new Hitler … the banks the new weapons of mass (social) destruction .. the governments the willing executioner of a neo-feudal ideology (“neo-liberalism”).

Paul Krugman noted in an interview that the German word for debt (Schulden) is almost synonymous with the German word for guilt (Schuld) and speculated how this would influence German thinking …

 

StiglitzJoe Stiglitz recently wrote about the problems in the Eurozone (and the Greek drama within it):

That concern for popular legitimacy is incompatible with the politics of the eurozone, which was never a very democratic project. Most of its members’ governments did not seek their people’s approval to turn over their monetary sovereignty to the ECB. When Sweden’s did, Swedes said no. They understood that unemployment would rise if the country’s monetary policy were set by a central bank that focused single-mindedly on inflation (and also that there would be insufficient attention to financial stability). The economy would suffer, because the economic model underlying the eurozone was predicated on power relationships that disadvantaged workers.

Yes, this is the key point: economic policy and financial control are about POWER RELATIONSHIPS not mathematical models that have nothing to do with the real world. Steve Keen makes fun of the fact that banks and credit play no role in neoclassical economic models (and rightly so) but I now think this was no “mistake” or oversight, this was done on purpose … to hide the role of banks, finance as power-players in the economy … (they even invented a FAKE NOBEL prize to glorify the fancy mathematics that passes as “econometrics”)

If the consequences for the Greek people – and all of us in Europe – were not so dire, this whole charade (“of debt negotiations”) would be laughable. A kind of sinister, political farce, written by Kafka (“the institutions”) and directed by Orwell (Eurogroup should change its name to “MINISTRY OF TRUTH”.

I leave the last words to Guido Preparata (author of Conjuring Hitler, a very distressing exposé about the rise of Hitler, financed by Anglo-American money …. and encourage you to think about what the role of the US oligarchy in all of this Euro-Game is ….)

So-called democracy is a sham, the ballot a travesty. In modern bureaucratized systems whose birth dates from the mid 19th century, the feudal organization has been carried to the next level, so to speak. A chief objective of what Thucydides referred to in his epoch as synomosiai (literally “exchange of oaths”) – i.e. the out-of-sight fraternities acting behind the ruling clans – has been the process of the exaction of rents from the population (i.e. a free income in the form of rents, financial charges and like thefts) as unfathomable and impenetrable as possible. The tremendous sophistication, and the propagandistic wall of artfully divulged misconceptions surrounding the banking systems which is the chief instrument wherewith the hierarchs expropriate and control the wealth of their supporting community, is the limpid testimony of this essential transformation undergone by the feudal / oligarchic organization in the modern era.

The West has moved from a low-tech agrarian establishment built upon the backs of disenfranchised serfs to a highly mechanized post-industrial hive that feeds off the strength of no less disenfranchised blue- and white collar slaves, whose lives are mortgaged to buy into the vogue of modern consumption. The latter-day lords of the manor are no longer seen demanding tribute since they have relied on the mechanics of banking accounts for the purpose, whereas the sycophants of the median class, as academics and publicists, have consistently remained loyal to the synomosiai.

P.S.

From the “Agreement” with the Troika (page 5):

The government NEEDS TO CONSULT AND AGREE with the institutions ON ALL DRAFT LEGISLATION in relevant areas with adequate time BEFORE submitting it for public consultation or to Parliament …” !!!!

How could Alexis Tsipras even contemplate to sign this capitulation to the “modern dictatorship of money”?! If Greece wants to regain her dignity she MUST get out of the Euro (and NATO) and prevent the BIG SALE of her assets before it is too late …

AND FINALLY ….WHAT ABOUT THIS?

Tulane University oil expert David Hynes told an audience in Athens recently that Greece could potentially solve its entire public debt crisis through development of its new-found gas and oil. He conservatively estimates that exploitation of the reserves already discovered could bring the country more than €302 billion over 25 years. The Greek government instead has just been forced to agree to huge government layoffs, wage cuts and pension cuts to get access to a second EU and IMF loan that will only drive the country deeper into an economic decline. [4]

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Ukraine: Nightingale and Mockingbird

Nazis Made in USAI have written 150 articles on my German blog and did not have the time to write much on this site thinking that there are already a billion English bloggers  so who is going to read one more?

But the events in Ukraine are so important to the course of history (they might lead to WW III) and our understanding of Eurasian geopolitics that I have decided to post this article. Especially the Neo-Nazi massacre in Odessa which the German media has  ignored is a good reason to share my thoughts and the information I have gathered in the last months also with an English speaking audience.

The following essay was originally not written as a blog-post but as a series of replies to articles by Robert Parry (on Ukraine) who is an excellent journalist of the highest integrity. So debating some of his arguments or commenting on his perspective is a welcome change from the rubbish our mainstream “churnalists” turn out every day.

Yes, the government in Kiev is a fascist government and yes, there are Neo-Nazi storm / shock troops who have spread fear and terror since the Putsch “government” was installed in Kiev. So when Putin is referring to these facts it has nothing to do with “Russian propaganda to destablize Ukraine”.

US and British support for old and New Nazis goes back to the 1920s and many books have been written about that but I start here with 1945.  I was taught in school that “America” saved us from fascism but I know now that this was just another Big Lie .. Read on to understand why …

THE  ‘FIRE  VICTIMS’  STORY

The trade union building Odessa was not engulfed in flames as many media reports suggested

Robert, you write important articles about Ukraine but regarding the “fire victims” storyline you are misinformed. Most of the people in the labour union building in Odessa DID NOT DIE as a RESULT of the FIRE. The fire served only to DISTRACT ATTENTION from what was really going on inside: a Massacre in the style of a Nazi-Pogrom:

Isn’t it remarkable, that on the same day, May 2 in 1933 Hitler’s private armies, the SA and SS stormed labour union buildings all over Germany and deported the unionists to concentration camps? (some of them were tortured and killed). Given the knowledge I have gathered about the historical roots of the “ultra-nationalist” parties in Ukraine (codeword for Neo-Nazi) I find it extremely unlikely that the events in Odessa were happening on the same day in May just as a coincidence …

(WARNING: the following links contain graphic material of murder victims in Odessa)

Photos of the victims in Odessa show that the people were strangled with cables, shot in the head, or beaten to death. Their bodies were then dosed with an inflammable substance to hide the real cause of death. As some corpses clearly show because they are only partially burned (sometimes only the head and shoulders) while the rest of the body (including the clothes) are almost untouched.

You are also (unintentionally, I am sure) misleading the readers when you mention how under Reagan close ties were formed with Neo-Nazi groups in Latin America including the funding and training of “death-squads” against the rebellious poor. While this is certainly true, US-support for old and new Nazis goes back much further.

mykola-lebedIn 1945 tens of thousands of Nazi war criminals were brought to the US under the guise of the status as “displaced persons”. One of them, Mykola Lebed (see photo on the left) had been the head of the Ukrainian Gestapo “SB” (fused with a paramilitary group named UPA, which committed unspeakable atrocities against Poles in Volnya (100,000 victims) and also against the Jewish population.

The immigration authorities tried to block this because Lebed had been sentenced for planning the murder of the Polish Interior Minister in 1934 but the CIA and the DOJ intervened several times to ensure that this Nazi war-criminal (CIC files describe him as “known sadist and Nazi-collaborator) could not only enter the US but became a US citizen in no time.

Dulles letter LebedAllen Dulles personally wrote a letter to the DOJ to stress how important this man was for the CIA and that it must be guaranteed that his movements in and out of the US would not attract media spotlight to avoid drawing attention on the “operations” he was involved in.

When blood is up to the knee then the Ukraine will be free

(battle-chant of the “Banderas”, UPA members)

The US government not only protected these war criminals and Nazis for decades against prosecution but also supported a propaganda network to whitewash their crimes during the war. In return these people were (not only) employed to demonize the role of the Soviet Union (during and after the war) which – in reality – had saved Europe and the Ukraine from the evil reign of the Nazis (with 27 million “Russians” left dead).

The CIA used these criminals to “keep the flame of nationalism alive” (in the Baltics and especially in Ukraine).

Americas_Nazi_SecretSee also the book America’s Nazi Secret by John Loftus (fmr. “renegade” attorney for the DOJ; interviews with Loftus are also available on YouTube)

and Russ Bellant for the entanglement of the Republican Party with the old and new Nazis from the Baltic States and Ukraine.

It is now clear to me that the evil seed of Nazism, sown by the Anglo-American power elites after WWI (to set Germany and Russia against each other as in divide et impera) and never weeded out after WWII but instead “used” for Cold War purposes has now come into full bloom again … the UPA in Ukraine is back … another “indigenous monster” created by the puppet masters for their own geo-political games (like “Gladio” in Europe or Al Qaeda in the Caucasus, the ME and now Africa…)

God help us against these crazy, self-righteous bastards who run the “foreign policy” of the only “superpower” on this planet, and my sincerest apologies to the Russians for the treatment their president gets in our (German and English speaking) despicable media.

(Pt. II reply to an earlier article about what “Obama can do to save Ukraine” with some new material added)

THE  BRILLIANT ACT OF HYPNOSIS

“It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn’t happening. It didn’t matter. It was of no interest. The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It’s a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis.”

Source: Harold Pinter Nobel Prize Lecture “Art, Truth and Politics” , 2005 (second half of the text beginning with “Political language …)

feeling us values(Pinter’s analysis is in my opinion the masterkey to understanding how  the US is controlling the fawning media in Europe and the US who are admiring the Naked Emperor while ignoring his crimes …)

Back to Ukraine and Robert Parry:

These people [the foreign policy establishment] are not able to “recognize the complex reality of Ukraine” because they live in a fantasy world where their support for a gargantuan, aggressive military-industrial-intelligence-machine of endless war and destruction needs to be justified by the existence of a “Manichean devil”. These devils have been created with massive financial assistance from Wall Street (which includes London bankers) since 1900 first with the Bolsheviks, then Hitler and the NSDAP as the most prominent examples.

After 1945 the Bolsheviks morphed in no time from former allies into the “Evil Empire” of the Soviet Union which served for 45 years as the psychological projection screen for capitalism’s own systemic crimes against humanity.

So all the massacres, subversions, overthrows of elected governments, economic, psychological, political and “kinetic” warfare – in other words the enormous suffering brought on millions of people – could be justified as “necessary defense against a threat to our liberty”.

(On the self-indoctrination of  the “national security managers” during the Cold War see the brilliant book IDEAL  ILLUSIONS by James Peck)

With the demise of the SU the “devil” had apparently disappeared so on “9/11” they created a new one:Terrorism”.

It had to be “Islamic” terrorism to have a pretext for invading, plundering and destroying the few countries with energy resources in the Middle East, which still cling to the absurd notion that they have a right of self-determination in economic and political affairs AND have the audacity to expose Israel as a Rogue State with WMDs.

THE  BATTLE  FOR  EURASIA

Ring_Around_Russia-smNow as the (ZB™) foreign policy “pivot” has shifted towards Asia, “Eurasia” has (once again) become the focal point for “intervention” of all sorts. Russia has been surrounded with NATO bases and Orwellian “missile shields”. Most governments of the Baltic States and the former SU in Eastern Europe are now US “clients”. Russia was looted by Western companies and Eastern oligarchs when the corrupt drunkard Yeltsin was in power. When he brought out the tanks against his own parliament (which tried to stop the looting) the West said nothing and Wall Street applauded.

The corrupt but democratically elected Yanukovich tried to establish Ukraine as a neutral (non-aligned) power between Russia and US / NATOstan (formerly known as Europe) and realizing, that a “co-operation treaty” with the EU would ruin the (already weak) country, he opted for economic cooperation with Russia.

Then the CIA-controlled (Gladio style) Neo-Nazi hordes were let loose on the “Maidan” (in addition to the – carefully prepared and executed – ongoing civil society subversion with NGOs operating under the guise of “democracy promotion” à la Gene Sharp / the Albert Einstein Institute (front) and others) to get rid of Yanukovich. This was presented to the world as a “democratic revolution”.

oleh-tyahnybok-1

Oleh Tyanybok leader of the “Svoboda” party (original name: Social nationalist party of Ukraine

The new, handpicked Brown-Shirt government (which includes Neo-liberals and Neo-Nazis, two sides of the same coin) – with a neoliberal banker as president – has difficulties to hide the fanatic, racist “nationalism” of its foot-soldiers and ideologues who want an “ethnically-pure” Ukraine and were brainwashed to hate everything “Russian”.

Like the Pavlovian dogs, they salivate every time they hear (or say) the derogatory term for Russians: “Moskal’s” and direct their irrational hatred on the imagined Triplet-enemy: Russian-Jew-Communist (this is exactly what Hitler also did to incite ethnic hatred for political purposes)

MORAL ILLUSIONS

Robert, have you realized that these crazies who are in charge of “foreign policy” HAVE TO “exclude the nasty reality of what has actually occurred (not just] in Ukraine” in order to keep up the fantasy that they are the good guys representing a “good” country which stands for democracy and freedom …? You really cannot discuss the motives of US “foreign policy” without the help of a psychiatrist ….

So of course neither Obama nor anyone else of these psychopaths would ever “admit” (neither to themselves nor to the public) what they are actually doing: committing unspeakable crimes and violating every rule of human decency that was ever invented.

warispeaceThey don’t want to “bring this crisis under control” …they CREATED it … they need wars and conflicts of all sorts because it gives them the feeling of power and the “Neo-Con” (more “con” than “neo”) disciples of Leo Strauss and Nietzsche regard WAR as the ultimate – and even noble – expression of political power, of the “right of the superior” to subjugate and destroy “the inferior”.

(And please do not use the word “conspiracy theory” when you mean “pretext” … it is a stigma-word to immunize oneself against valid arguments by denigrating the persons who use these arguments … and is really aimed at the audience  … but in this case there are no “valid” arguments as you perfectly know …)

Putin has to become the new “devil” since he is the only one available and strong enough for this role in the Great Game” of getting Eurasia (energy-wise) under control AND because he has started to subvert the dollar-hegemony (huge gas /trade deals with China to be paid in their own respective currencies) … AND there is a project of the BRICS countries to create their own “development bank” in order to evade the tyranny of the US-led IMF banking cartel.

CHARACTER ASSASSINATION or Attack is the Best Defense

Of course, students of the (real history) of American foreign policy know that US elites have no credibility whatsoever and their moral posture lecturing other leaders about democracy and freedom is utterly ridiculous and hypocritical. But you can seemingly elevate you own moral status by denigrating your opponent with a massive “strategic information” campaign in order to demonize this person in the eyes  of the public.

Putin smilingSo they are going to destroy Putin’s credibility so that no matter what he says or what he does, the audience must be conditioned to shudder at the mere mention of his name, or when they hear the adjective “pro-Russian” framed in the context of aggression and violence (parotted in the news in Germany 24/7) .

Your are right, Putin wants to be respected as a statesman and he wants even more respect for Russia which he brought back from the brink of ruin to a major player in world affairs – but no empire.

27 Million “Russians” died in WWII, the soldiers among them had defeated 90% of the German Wehrmacht divisions at the horrible Eastern Front while we were taught in history lessons that “America” has saved us from fascism. What a cruel joke.

Hitlers ShadowIt was “America” (as the new version of the British Empire) that protected the worst Nazi criminals from prosecution and used them to build their “Intelligence” agencies and new networks of subversion and terror in Latin America and in Europe. (The “American people” had of course no say in the matter …)

So Putin is right, when “he has come to view the U.S. government and the EU as sources of endless double standards and double talk, places without honour” – that’s what they are … predatory finance and capitalism have no “honour” .. it does not pay …

You mentioned JFK’s American university address: (with this speech his signed his death warrant) There is one simple sentence in it which I find extremely important:

“I also believe that we must re-examine our own attitude – as individuals and as a Nation- for our attitude is as essential as theirs.”

Self-reflection is a normal and necessary thing for grown-up, intelligent people but can anyone imagine a member of the US power establishment saying these words today in public? No way.

Robert, in your article you are finally wondering “whether Obama can pick up Kennedy’s torch of peaceful understanding” and see the world through the eyes of the other side, etc.

These people live in another moral universe than the rest of us … in it there is no place “for peaceful understanding” only dominance for the “chosen” ones and subservience for the others.

The US Empire is built on massive self-deception and a moralizing, crusading ethos to legitimate the crimes of aggression against the rest of the world.

As Shakespeare wrote in Hamlet, self-honesty is the basis for moral actions toward others … “and as the day follows the night, thou canst not then be false to any other man” (if I remember the words correctly).

“Talks” about one or the other crisis are meaningless when the only superpower is utterly dishonest … I really feel sorry for Sergei Lavrov who has to sit at the “negotiating table” with these double-dealing hypocrites …

William Blum puts it in a nutshell:

(Dear children), US foreign policy does not mean well …  But when will the “churnalists” get that?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Scahill & Greenwald: The Wrong Target (& the wrong context)

 

che statliberty with gunSo there we have it: Jeremy Scahill and Glen Greenwald, regarded by many people as two of the best (and last) investigative journalists of the US, have delivered their first jointly written article:

What a big disappointment for all people who are still able to think for themselves. Why? Read on to understand why this ostensible “revealing” of a “secret role” of the NSA is a red herring …

1 WHAT IS THE TOPIC OF THE ARTICLE?

The gist of it is that the authors are pointing out the “unreliability of the NSA’s targeting methods” because it results in the killing of “innocent people” abroad. N.B.: This is presented in the context of the GWOT (“Global War on Terror”), the tireless “counterterrorism” activities of US-government agencies which (conveniently) escalated after 9/11.

This exciting game of “geo-locating” suspected evil-doers in foreign lands (or rather their SIM-card) with modern surveillance and wireless technology, blown up to STASI meets GESTAPO-like proportions by the NSA, enables the “the CIA and U.S. military to conduct night raids and drone strikes to kill or capture the individual in possession of the device.”

The criticism rests on the fact that mostly signal intelligence (SIGINT) is used as the basis for these military “missions”. The victims violent death (whose identity was never verified by people on the ground) is caused by “unreliable metadata”, observed “activities on a SIM-card”, in other words IT-systems, algorithms, computer programs, etc. so in the end electronic devices determine how and if a “target” is selected (or so it seems).

An algorithm is a step-by-step list of directions that need to be followed to solve a problem. The instructions should be simple enough such that each step can be done without thinking about it. […]

(That sounds about right for the “intelligence” community …and by the way How can you solve complex political problems with mathematical formulae?)

Unlawful Death by Algorithmic Logic?

Deputy chief minister of Pakistan's NortThe NSA did not care to comment on the effectiveness of the “we track ‘em you whack ‘em” co-operation between the NSA, the CIA and the “special forces” of the US military. Only a spokesperson for the NSC told the authors that they do rely on human intelligence (HUMINT in spook parlance) after people have been murdered if there is reason to believe that civilians are among the casualties. That’s something, isn’t it?

The undisclosed source for this article is a former JSOC drone operator who “remains highly disturbed” about the targeting tactics used to locate the cell phones of “terror suspects” because (as the article explains in more detail) they are “fundamentally flawed”.

At the same time we learn that this guy “is adamant that the technology has been responsible for taking out terrorists and networks of people facilitating improvised explosive device attacks against U.S. forces in Afghanistan  […].”  The obvious “doublethink” of this guy apparently does not bother the authors.

The anonymous former drone operator, who killed strangers in foreign lands with hellfire missiles, cluster bombs and other ghastly weapons, is also quoted with this telling remark:

“It’s of course assumed that the phone belongs to a human being who is nefarious and considered an ‘unlawful enemy combatant. This is where it gets very shady.”

(The importance of this remark and the context in which it is presented will be analysed below).

The article goes on to say that the Taliban “are increasingly aware of these tactics and have begun to confuse their trackers: “… they have purposely and randomly distributed SIM cards among their units in order to elude their trackers.”

I am not going into any more “details” of the article here because in my opinion it is a journalistic charade (or “psy-op”, if you will) and distracts from the real BIG ISSUE behind the drone program and all other surveillance, tracking and “lethal operations” (read: murder)” activities of the US in foreign countries:

2 GLOBAL MURDER INC.: THE LEGAL PERSPECTIVE

The war on terrorism is a bunch of crap.”

Brendan Bryant, former drone-sensor operator on German TV, Nov 28, 2013.

brandon-bryant

Scahill and Greenwald tell us that the story is corroborated by Brendan Bryant, another after-the-fact kind of military “whistle-blower” who left the US Air Force in 2011. The article also says that Bryant “is committed to informing the public about lethal flaws in the U.S. drone program”. This is a misleading understatement:

Bryant appeared in a political Talk-Show on German public TV (ARD) at the end of November last year. The topic of the discussion was “The Secret War”- examining the role of the German government in facilitating illegal US military operations abroad. (“AFRICOM” is headquartered in Ramstein, Germany –drone strikes in Somalia were directed from there, a violation of German and international law).

NO-ONE DESERVES TO DIE”

Bryant said at the beginning: “I was supposed to protect people” (he originally worked as a video-analyst) but as a drone-sensor operator he realized it was all about “killing people and destroying things”. When the talk-show host, Beckmann asked him what he saw on his screen, he answered: “You see people dying … how can you just sit and watch death and destruction?”

He realized that the individual – a human being in a foreign country – is being reduced to a “target” (a thing … stripped of his humanity) and added: “…(but) you see how they interact with their kids, play soccer, etc. …  there is not the intimacy of a battle on the ground but [in contrast to bomber pilots] still you see the consequence of your actions (people dying, their body ripped apart by ghastly weapons…)… … it’s not an “aseptic killing” (just pushing a button to hit a “target”) … there should be no way to accept it (the self-deluding, exculpatory ideology behind the drone strikes). His most important statement regarding the “target” was probably this:

“He has a life just like you … they want us to think that if they say he is an extremist, he deserves to die. With this mind-set they could say the same about you one day … No-one deserves to die.”

Then he added that the cold-blooded murder of the American Muslim cleric Awlaki and his teenage-son Abdulrahman in Yemen (also mentioned in the article and often told by Jeremy Scahill before)

Abdulrahman

gave him the final creeps as he realized that these “missions” were criminal acts, severe violations of the US constitution: “..the pursuit of liberty and justice for all” cannot be reconciled with the concept of “extrajudicial or targeted killings”. Call it what you like, the fact remains the same:

All these “operations” in foreign countries are grave breaches of international law (the hard-earned principle of the inviolability of state sovereignty), the Human Rights Charta of the UN and of course the legal principle of due process, habeas corpus, etc. which protect individuals from the abuse of state-power. Bryant stressed that everybody has a right to “a fair and speedy trial” – in other words the government must prove their alleged guilt in a courtroom beyond a reasonable doubt and the whole concept of killing a “terror-suspect” because he might be planning to do something against the wishes of the US-hegemon is ludicrous and mad.

But of course we all know that the synthetic terror of 9/11, 7/7, the Madrid bombings, etc. were the big “game changer” in the legal dimension. Like the Nazis did in the 1930s, “emergency laws” were passed quickly and the fear induced by the new version of the “Manichean devil” (Bin Laden / Al Qaeda®) was used to drive the “bewildered herd” but also many so called “intellectuals” into mental submission by simply using the immunizing stigma-word  “conspiracy theory”:

The first and simplest stage of discipline, which can be taught even to young children,is called in Newspeak,Crimestop. Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought.[…]

Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity.

George Orwell, 1984

When I read the comments on the article, many people thanked Scahill and Greenwald for their “excellent job”, etc. But I don’t think they deserve any gratefulness from us because by narrowing the debate to a technical level (flawed and unreliable methods) they do us a great disservice.

Violence has become the nation’s leading industry…How could we even discuss these issues, if we cannot face up to this arrogant sense of our own superiority, this assumption that it is our God-given role to be the dominant power of the world?”

Senator J. William Fulbright: The Arrogance of Power (1967)

Stressing the point that “the wrong people” get killed by the NSA / CIA / JSOC joint murder operations helps to distract attention from the real concerns of paramount importance:

THE US HAS NO RIGHT WHATSOEVER TO TRACK, OBSERVE, LET ALONE HARM OR KILL ANYBODY IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY.

THE WHOLE “WAR ON TERROR” IS A MONUMENTAL SCAM based on the BIG LIE: 9/11.

The article is written in the spirit and context of “counter-terrorism” in other words it does not even once question / criticize

  • the validity of the underlying premise of the “War on Terror”: that the US is protecting its citizens from harm by killing “suspected” terrorists
  • the illegality of the drone operations and all other (more or less covert) activities of US agencies in foreign countries
  • the cowardice, criminality and bestiality of murdering people with drones (often executing a second strike when family members or other bystanders are trying to aid the first victim …)
  • the utter contempt of the US government for the fundamental legal principles of a civilized society
  • the real guiding principles of American foreign policy and its gargantuan “national security” apparatus
  • that the whole “counter-terrorism” (to protect lives) context is a charade designed to cloak its real purpose: serving as a pretext to undermine the legal restraints achieved after two world wars and re-instate the jus ad bellum although officially the US is not at war (with Pakistan, Yemen, etc.)
  • the fundamental structures of American power

The article’s obvious concern with an “unreliable tactic that results in the deaths of innocent or unidentified people” seems noble but is missing the point:

“They might have been terrorists,” he says. “Or they could have been family members who have nothing to do with the target’s activities.” We’re not going after people – we’re going after their phones, in the hopes that the person on the other end of that missile is the bad guy.”

Even if the person (carrying the targeted phone or SIM card) is “a bad guy” and the decision to “geo-locate” this individual is based on “information from a variety of sources and methods before we draw conclusions”, even if Obama did “kill terrorists with the utmost precision” the US HAS

  • NO RIGHT WHATSOEVER TO TERRORIZE THESE PEOPLE IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES WITH ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE, NIGHTLY RAIDS, LET ALONE  DRONE ATTACKS.
  • NO RIGHT TO INTERFERE IN THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS OF ANY NATION, NO MATTER HOW NOBLE THE PRETEXT

At first sight the article seems to be critical of the drone strikes but there are some revealing sentences which call into question the real purpose of its publication:

“The government does not appear to apply the same standard of care in selecting whom to target for assassination.”

The former JSOC drone operator goes on to say that almost 90% of the drone attacks was “triggered by SIGINT,’ which means it was triggered by a geo-location cell [a special unit within the NSA]. Scahill and Greenwald then lament the fact that the WaPo published an article heralding “the NSA’s claims about its effectiveness at locating terror suspects (and relying only on government sources).

drone wars

Any journalist who cares for democratic principles and the rule of law (among civilized peoples) must be aware of the implicit meaning of this sentence: instead of worrying about the inadequate standards used to select “targets for assassination” the outrage ought to be directed against the real and huge problem –

The notion that a “superpower” can terrorize and kill anybody anywhere as long as the media narrative provides some moral fig-leaf for the illegal and inhumane “missions”.

The information that the CIA “utilizes a pod on aircraft that vacuums up massive amounts of data from any wireless routers, computers, smart phones or other electronic devices that are within range” might raise alarm bells in the minds of the readers but this disturbing emotion is quickly “balanced” with the mentioning of the big black bogeyman, Al Qaeda (AQ): if communication devices are “believed to be used by Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula then of course we surely understand the need to “vacuum up massive amounts of data” …and call this Orwellian operation “VICTORYDANCE”, semantically celebrating the great achievement of the joint NSA/CIA effort to “map the Wi-Fi fingerprint of nearly every major town in Yemen.” (Soon coming to a major town here?)

Another revealing sentence is this one:

 “JSOC acknowledges that it would be completely helpless without the NSA conducting mass surveillance on an industrial level,” the former drone operator says. “That is what creates those baseball cards you hear about,” featuring potential targets for drone strikes or raids.

I find the use of the word “helpless” in this context very odd: JSOC is a “special forces” team, meaning tough guys prepared to commit all sorts of crimes in foreign countries only because they have been told how “elite” and secret their unit is and that they are carrying out noble missions for the greatest country on earth (the same indoctrination was used by the Nazis for the Waffen-SS). Why put such a statement into the article?

To “balance” the impact of the critique concerning the “flawed methods” of the NSA? This could even be seen as an attempt to legitimize the mass surveillance of the NSA …

who are the real terroristsWhy do Scahill / Greenwald mention

  • that the village in Al-Majala province where women and 22 children were massacred with Tomahawk missiles (releasing hundreds of cluster bomblets which “each explode into over 200 sharp steel fragments that can cause injuries 150m away” – see also his excellent video-documentary “Dirty Wars”) was “an alleged AQ camp”  – to make the brutality and illegality of the attack appear more “reasonable”?
  • that it is “not clear whether the strike was based on metadata collection?
  • What difference does it make to the victims and their relatives if these people were murdered based on HUMINT or SIGINT or a combination of both?  Again, the brutality and illegality of these crimes against humanity (and the unbearable arrogance and self-delusion behind it) must be the focus of the journalistic work not the “flawed tactics” of an insane surveillance system
  • this statement of the former JSOC drone operator:  ‘This isn’t a science. This is an art.’ It’s kind of a way of saying that it’s not perfect.”

Wow. So terrorizing people (whose identity you don’t even know) in faraway countries with a totalitarian surveillance system and “stand-by” killer-drones (with no accountability whatsoever for the perpetrators) is considered “an art” by these people.

reaper Pakistan

The authors make us realize that the application of these new technologies, mean a “deviation from standard operating methods of war” and “represent the dawn of a new era” (comparing their impact to the first atomic bombs dropped in Japan) the military apparently salivating at the thought of how immensely powerful they become with weapons like these) but again they frame the issue (downplay it) by ignoring the legal (illegal) and immoral dimension of the whole “mission” and by using the same misleading military jargon as the perpetrators of these crimes …

KEEP FEEDING THE BEAST

mlk beyoond vietnam--spiritual death

Martin Luther King said in his best speech (“Beyond Vietnam” – for which he was killed exactly one year later):

“My government is the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today.”

This was true in the 1960s but it is also true today (even more so). Perhaps Scahill and Greenwald should concern themselves with the “bigger picture” before writing about drone wars and the flaws of surveillance systems but the only journalists capable of understanding the real (moral) dimension of what is going on seems to be the wonderful Chris Hedges …

That the whole charade of “national security” is (and always has been) a billion dollar game of deception and intrigue so that the military-intelligence-finance-organized crime-complex gets more power and more influence to conduct their psychological, ideological and “kinetic” wars. A good start would be the books and interviews of Colonel Fletcher Prouty who witnessed the establishment of the CIA as a shadowy network reaching into all civilian and military power structures of the United States and over time became a global covert force (see also the GLADIO operations in Europe). CIA, NSA, JSOC, NSC, whatever their names and acronyms are, taken together they constitute a state within a state and if Obama thinks he is the “commander in chief” he should think twice …

Another extremely important book to see through the maze of deception called “national security” is Ideal Illusions by James Peck. Peck combed through the national archives very thoroughly and exposed how the national security managers deluded themselves (and others) by projecting their own criminal intentions and ideological self-indoctrination on the “enemy” (then “communism” with the embodiment of evil, the Soviet Union). The book is also a treasure-trove for political quotations – here is just a small selection – still relevant today (just replace communism with “terrrorim”, the indoctrination and hypocrisy are the same …)

“More can be won by illusion than by coercion”. Harold Laswell

Isn’t it true that we very often tend to accuse someone with whom we are a rival of the very thing that we have in mind ourselves?”

Senator Fulbright, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations: Hearings on psychological aspects on foreign policy, June 1969

 

Just because Goebbels and the Kremlin debased it, that is no reason why we cannot elevate it …”

C.D.Jackson, 1947  expert of psychological “operations” under Eisenhower

 

Americans are funny kids … they are always sticking their noses into somebody’s business which isn’t any of theirs. We send missionaries and political propagandists to China, Turkey, India, and everywhere to tell people how to live … Russia won’t let them in. But when Russia puts out propaganda to help our parlour pinks – well, that’s bad – so we think. There is not any difference between the two approaches except one is ‘my approach’ and the other is ‘yours’. Just a ‘moat and beam’ affair.”

The Private Papers of Harry S. Truman (1980)

 

 “You all start with the promise that democracy is some good. I don’t think it is worth a damn .. people say, ‘if Congress were more representative of the people it would be better’. I say the Congress is too damn representative. It’s just as stupid as the people are, just as uneducated, just as dumb, just as selfish.”

Dean Acheson (oral interview, Truman Presidential Library) p.24

 “No – but two wrongs never make a right. You Americans are shocked when we are neutral between the two of you. We are not neutral as between freedom and slavery, democracy and dictatorship, but we are neutral as between great power rivalry.

We don’t see the Russian fleet in Oriental waters. We see only the American fleet. We don’t see the Russian Army in mainland China but we see a good deal of the US army in Formosa, Japan, Korea, and Okinawa and the Philippines.”

(Report on the image of the US in other countries (George Allen, Director of the US Information Agency in India asking if thepeople did condone the totalitarian internal policies of the soviets the answer was –)

In my opinion the key and eye-opening insight of the book is (in a nutshell) this:

– highly relevant today also in the context of the “war on terror” and the “promotion of democracy” charade (the latest victim being Ukraine)-

“The cold war then was never about protecting- or even accepting – the sovereignty of other nations … but rather about finding ever more effective ways to break down barriers to American influence. It was always about penetrating other nations, which is why weaker nations were insisting upon the principle of non-intervention in other countries internal affairs and have been ever since. ..”

but

THE NAKED EMPEROR IS STILL ADMIRED FOR HIS WONDERFUL CLOTHES (see Geneva and Sochi “reporting”) … the media is just an assembly line for “pasteurized” news … the  reality is unspeakable:

The United States is a rogue state .. it has committed more crimes (“peacetime operations” in CIA parlance) than any other country on this planet … it is the ultimate terrorist … and yet manages to pose as a moral authority … (see Harold Pinter’s Nobel speech in 2005) and  keeps lecturing others on democracy and freedom …

Full spectrum dominance indeed … (the ultimate power is thought control …)

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Persians, Pharisees and Phony US “Anti-Proliferation

This is a reply to Iran Slams US as ‘World’s Only Atomic Criminal’

ISRAEL: A SAFE HAVEN FOR JEWS? FORGET IT


“Israel never confirms or denies claims that it has nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. The country positions itself outside international treaties, which would make it subject to inspection. They say the costs of such secrecy to Israeli democracy are too great. Uzi Even, was a young scientist working, in the 60s, at Dimona – Israel’s nuclear reactor….Today, Mr Even says it should be shut down.

Forty-year-old reactors tend to have accidents and he believes that Dimona, which is beyond the reach of the Israeli parliament, needs to be brought into a system of accountability and public scrutiny. Mr Even explained: “You should have an outside watchdog. “The secrecy more or less created an extra- territorial area in Israel where standard procedures of safety monitoring are not implemented. “So worker safety, environmental questions and industrial safety procedures, are not covered, and there are thousands of people working there.”

ENFORCED SILENCE


Nothing illustrates this better than the sensitive issue of Dimona’s cancer victims. In an Israeli documentary in 2002, Dimona workers said accidents had been routine. They spoke of explosions, fires and liquid and toxic gas leaks that they had to clean, often without protection.

The authorities denied they had worked with radioactive materials. They have refused to compensate them or their families for their years of loyal service. Because of the strict secrecy rules they were even unable to fight for their rights. When Correspondent approached one of the workers, who was dying of cancer, he refused to be interviewed – but with some regret.

Unaware he was being filmed, he said: “I wanted to talk to you but I have been silenced.

“They came from intelligence and told me not to talk. “They said I would be like Vanunu.” Vanunu has another year in jail. When his sentence is finished he hopes to emigrate to America. But Mr Horev has clearly let it be known he never intends to let Vanunu leave Israel.”

Source: BBC

Watch the shocking and still relevant documentary:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=178254070504611595#

.. the Israel people were exposed only to the Israeli media, the Israel media brainwash, the Israel media bias against me. Not they, they were not open to see all the story and all the danger of nuclear weapons in secret in such small state, Israel.

And also that these people was not exposed to the idea that these Israel people were sending a lot of propaganda, what they call holocaust industry, to know and to understand that nuclear weapons are the real holocaust and the Jewish people have no right and no justification to use the atomic bomb.”

Excerpt from an interview with Mordechai Vanunu by David Frost

From the BBC documentary:

“Despite claims that Dimona was for peaceful purposes only, Israel’s leader Ben Gurion was summoned to Washington.  President Kennedy feared an arms race in the Middle East and demanded inspections.But when inspectors finally entered the plant in May 1961 they were tricked. They were shown a fake control room on the ground floor. They were unaware of the six floors below where the plutonium was made.

Well this was something of great pride and almost a legendary story in Dimona, according to Vanunu.  When the Americans came they were completely hoodwinked. All the entrances including the lift shafts were bricked up and plastered over so it was impossible for anyone to find their way down to the lower floors.”

AFTER KENNEDY’S ASSASSINATION THE PRESSURE ON ISRAEL WAS OFF …


His successor Lyndon Johnson turned a blind eye. Then In 1969 Israel’s Golda Meir and President Richard Nixon struck a deal, renewed by every President to this day. Israel’s nuclear programme could continue as long as it was never made public. It’s called nuclear ambiguity.”

(The reporter interviews the former Israeli Prime Minister (now President) on the subject)

BBC: The term nuclear ambiguity, in some ways it sounds very grand.  But isn’t just a euphemism for deception?

PERES: If somebody wants to kill you, and you use a deception to save your life it is not immoral.  If we wouldn’t have enemies we wouldn’t need deceptions.  We wouldn’t need deterrent.

Remember this argument next time  Obama accuses Iran of  deception, although it has not violated any  (NPT) treaty obligations so far and the IAEA inspectors  have found no evidence for weapons-grade uranium enrichment let alone the production of plutonium …

BBC: Was this the justification for concealing the floors of the plutonium reprocessing areas from the Americans, the inspectors, when they came?

PERES: You are having a dialogue with yourself, not with me.

BBC: But that’s been documented in a number of books

PERES: Ask the question to yourself, not to me.I don’t have to answer your questions even.  I don’t see any reason why.”

Imagine, Ahmadinejad talking like that …  all hell would break loose…

As some arrogant asshole from a conservative think-tank said on the eve of the Iraq war to a peace activist who was accusing USrael of unbearable hypocrisy on the topic of WMD:

“It’s not the weapons, it’s WHO has them.

The same unacceptable and self-delusional “argument” was used by Benjamin Netanyahu recently, trying to justify Israel’s  immoral, hypocriticial and dangerous refusal to sign the NPT, to say nothing of the enforced media silence on the subject of demanding accountability for Israel’s nuclear arsenal,, while harping on about the manufactured “threat” from Iran.

We are the good  (morally and racially superior) guys, our diabolical weapons and even our cruelty are necessary for a “just” cause, so we are entitled to destroy and kill indiscriminately (Arabs, of course) – that line of argument goes back  directly to the Nuremberg trials …

Even US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates acknowledged, that Iran’s alleged “secret” attempts to acquire nuclear weapons are to be viewed in the context of deterrence, not military aggression, but he was quickly admonished for his candour and “brought back” in line with the official Zionist PR-story by Senator Graham …

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Do you believe the Iranians are trying to acquire nuclear weapons capability?

GATES: Yes, sir, I do.

GRAHAM: The president of Iran has publicly disavowed the existence of the Holocaust, he has publicly stated that he would like to wipe Israel off the map [NO, he has NOT!]. Do you think he’s kidding?

GATES: No, I don’t think he’s kidding. And—but I think that there are, in fact, higher powers in Iran than he, than the president. And I think that while they are certainly pressing, in my opinion, for a nuclear capability, I think that they would see it in the first instance as a deterrent. They are surrounded by powers with nuclear weapons—Pakistan to their east, the Russians to the north, the Israelis to the west, and us in the Persian Gulf—

GRAHAM: Do you believe the president of Iran is lying when he says he’s not?

GATES: Yes, sir.

GRAHAM: Do you believe the Iranians would consider using that nuclear weapons capability against the nation of Israel?

GATES: I don’t know that they would do that, Senator. I think that the risks for them obviously are enormously high. I think that they see value—

GRAHAM: If I may?

GATES: Yes, sir.

GRAHAM: Can you assure the Israelis that they will not attack Israel with a nuclear weapon, if they acquire one?

GATES: No, sir, I don’t think that anybody can provide that assurance.

How effective  propaganda (now called “strategic communication”) and global “churnalism” created the global “wiped-off-the-map” hoax, was also analyzed earlier by Jonathan Steele in The Guardian:

“Ask anyone in Washington, London or Tel Aviv if they can cite any phrase uttered by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the chances are high they will say he wants Israel “wiped off the map”.

Again it is four short words, though the distortion is worse than in the Khrushchev case. The remarks are not out of context. They are wrong, pure and simple. Ahmadinejad never said them. Farsi speakers have pointed out that he was mistranslated. The Iranian president was quoting an ancient statement by Iran’s first Islamist leader, the late Ayatollah Khomeini, that “this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time” just as the Shah’s regime in Iran had vanished.

He was not making a military threat. He was calling for an end to the occupation of Jerusalem at some point in the future. The “page of time” phrase suggests he did not expect it to happen soon. There was no implication that either Khomeini, when he first made the statement, or Ahmadinejad, in repeating it, felt it was imminent, or that Iran would be involved in bringing it about.”

If you want to understand what “churnalism” is all about (the media acting as as a flock of sheep or an echo-chamber …) try this video:

Back to the BBC documentary:

“The programme listed more than a hundred Dimona workers
who’d developed cancer and whose claims were being ignored
. A doctor and two lawyers backed their story. It was the first time Dimona workers had spoken out.

BBC: “I want to talk to Ariel Spieler.  He’s suffering from cancer and in the last few years he’s seen a number of his friends and colleagues who worked there with him die of the disease. He’s been fighting for compensation for their families, for their widows, and I know he’d really like to talk to us about this. He’s told me he wishes he could, but he’s also told me he’s been warned off.  He’s been told not to talk.  I’m going to go and see him and see if he’ll change his mind.”

Spieler: “The Secret Service silenced me.They’ve silenced me completely. They told me not to say one word. What can I do?  What can I do? They told me: “You’ll end up like Vanunu”.How long has he been in prison? 15 years? Do you want me to go to jail?

BBC: “I really wanted to talk. I asked the others but they refused.Nobody wants to talk… the doctors, the relatives, the lawyers. Nobody is prepared to talk about it. I just don’t get it.

If this was Iraq or North Korea I’d understand why people are so scared to talk. But this is Israel.

This is supposed to be a democracy.”

(Perception is everything…)







Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

“Crying and Shooting” with EU support

Separation Wall with BalloonUN ENDORSES GAZA WAR CRIMES REPORT

Given the extremely difficult circumstances, I think Judge Goldstone did a good job with his report on Operation Cast Lead. Those who accuse him of “bias” should present facts that support their allegations or keep quiet.

His findings simply confirm a long line of previous reports from Human Rights Organisations (including B’t Selem) and the revelations by groups like “Breaking the Silence” although there is one dubious premise which needs to be clarified:

I absolutely agree with Norman Finkelstein, that to refer to the massacre in Gaza as a “war” is totally unacceptable and deliberately misleading, given the huge disparity of force between Hamas militants and the IDF and the fact, that the real military  target was  the civilian  population (as the report confirmed). From the days of Ben Gurion, it was clear to all Israeli leaders that the greatest threat, the “time-bomb” for the “Jewish” state has been the significantly higher birth rate of Palestinians. So from this cynical standpoint, killing women and children indiscriminately, does make sense ….(even poisoning the survivors (their DNA) with DU, DIME and other “novel” weapons ..)

Who can be so cruel? This is a demonization of the  IDF and the political leaders of Israel you might think. Try this to grasp the moral abyss on which this state was founded:

Video: ?????????

Therefore, even though the “firing of (comparatively ridiculous) rockets” into civilian neighbourhoods may be a violation of humanitarian law in principle, the moral dimensions of Israel’s systemic violence ( i.e. the brutal occupation as such, assassinations of Hamas leaders in broad daylight (“extra-judicial killings”) which usually result in the death of many innocent bystanders, etc.) and the occasional symbolic outbursts of “revenge” through these rockets are totally different. This is also demonstrated by comparing the “fatalities” on each side: Can the killing of 1400 Palestinians be judged on the same moral basis as the death of 9 Israelis? (6 were members of security forces – Source: Bt Selem)

The hypocrisy here is in the legal groundwork: people under occupation are entitled to “resist”, to fight againt the occupier but they ought to restrict their attacks to the military. But in light of the seemingly endless horrors of the occupation, the brutal retaliations against peaceful demonstrations and rather harmless “resistance” like stone-throwing children, let alone the ongoing and intensifying violation of human rights in the form of land expropriation, evictions and the inhumane siege on Gaza, this restraint is practically impossible and would require super-human self-control.

I know I am walking on thin ice here because this kind of reasoning leads quickly  to the “argument” of  the  Israeli government: “Our violence is for a good cause, theirs is evil; we are only fighting back, they are the ones who threaten our security, etc.” Violence is always bad and I am not saying that firing rockets into civilian neighbouhoods is no big deal, but the perception Israel wants to create (that they act only in self-defense) is totally wrong as Professor Avi Shlaim also pointed out in January 2009:

“As always, mighty Israel claims to be the victim of Palestinian aggression but the sheer asymmetry of power between the two sides leaves little room for doubt as to who is the real victim.

This is indeed a conflict between David and Goliath, but the Biblical image has been inverted – a small and defenceless Palestinian David faces a heavily armed, merciless, and overbearing Israeli Goliath.

The resort to brute military force is accompanied, as always, by the shrill rhetoric of victimhood and a farrago of self-pity overlaid with self-righteousness. In Hebrew this is known as the syndrome of bokhim ve-yorim (“crying and shooting”).

Gaza-7thumbShlaim also demonstrates that the hailed “return of the Gaza strip” was just another PR-scam to present Israel (under Sharon) as striving for a peaceful solution while in fact they knew that the cruel (economic) stranglehold on Gaza combined with (little publicised, often clandestine) military aggression now and then would sooner or later lead to more “rocket firing” which could then be presented as proof for the “evil” intentions of Hamas and reinforce the recurring theme of “crying and shooting” … Shlaim goes on:

[…] Gaza, however, is not simply a case of economic underdevelopment but a uniquely cruel case of deliberate de-development. Israel turned the people of Gaza into a source of cheap labour and a captive market for Israeli goods.

The development of local industry was actively impeded so as to make it impossible for the Palestinians to end their subordination to Israel and to establish the economic underpinnings essential for real political independence.”

Numerous reports from the UN have also highlighted the dramatic situation in Gaza even before Operation Cast Lead began  (sewage systems on the brink of collapse, food scarcity, high unemployment, frequent power shortages, etc. – all the result of the isolation and siege of Gaza). And in the West Bank a smiliar strategy to destroy the economy (and hope) was used …

gaza_sewage_lakeGiven these horrific circumstances, this hopelessness, 1,4 million people being imprisoned in this small strip of land, helplessly watching how Israel steals more and more land in the West Bank and East Jeruslaem, and the “international community” does nothing to stop these crimes, it is remarkable that there have not been more outbursts of violence. No-one, not even Ghandi would have advocated civil disobedience in this scenario …

Goldstone knows perfectly well that the accurate historical context is necessary to be able to judge actions on both sides and he draws a clear picture about the events that lead to the end of Hamas initiated cease-fires. That is perhaps the main reason why Israel must prevent any detailed discussion of the report because then the whole “tapestry of lies” would fall apart ….

Besides, as far as I know, at the beginning of the intifada, the Palestinian attacks were limited to IDF soldiers but the massacre in a Hebron mosque in 1994 was the incentive for Hamas to attack also civilians inside Israel.

It is painfully clear, that Israel WANTS and NEEDS to provoke violent resistance so that it can portray its own cruelty and violence as “defense” in the context of the “war on terror” …

It is highly ironic, that the world has been duped into believing that Islam represents a threat to global security while in fact Zionism is the real threat (as political abuse of religion is has replaced Christian hypocrisy in the colonial mindset …) and is never even mentioned in this context (at least not here in Germany).

In his book Overcoming Zionism” Joel Kovel (a Jewish psychiatrist) shows the insanity of Zionism as a political instrument and the staggering hypocrisy and self-deception this has entailed: the eternal “victims” with their (self-attributed) high Jewish morality, created a state on the brutal expropriation and misery of another people. The “victims” (Zionism started long before Hitler appeared on the scene)  became racist perpetrators but in order to maintain their collective identity and exculpatory self-image,  they had to bend over backwards to put the blame somehow on the victims …. so they invented “reasons” why their criminal and inhumane actions could be justified before their conscience and before their God. This can be very well illustrated by a quote from Golda Meir:

“I will never forgive the Arabs for forcing us to kill them

Jewish souls are very special, no less than a part of God, so we have learned. Baruch Goldstein, a medical doctor, who committed the above mentioned massacre in Hebron,  refused to treat non-Jews, even in the IDF …

To return to the UN-GA resolution: I am deeply ashamed that with the exception of IRELAND, NO EU member state  has voted FOR  the resolution.

The majority of the EU-hypocrites abstained …

Considering how hard it was to fight for a Declaration of Human Rights, how many people suffered or even died to reach that goal,  I find it totally unacceptable that a “Human Rights Council” allows abstentions during a voting session.

Recently, I saw a movie called “One against the Wind” which tells the true story of a brave woman, who supported the resistance in France during the German occupation, by taking care of wounded allied soldiers and getting them out of the country. She was eventually sent to a concentration camp but survived … In one scene she tells the American ambassador in Paris (before the US entered the war): “There is a special hell for fence-sitters…” Precisely – in the context of Israel’s impunity this hell must already be heavily overcrowded …

In this insane world, where property rights, the “freedom” of capital  and “strategic interests” make a mockery of human “values” on a regular basis, we can no longer afford to “abstain”, when  the defense of these  values is called for. A supposedly universal “right” that exists only on paper, and is only defended when a certain category of people is involved, has not just lost its meaning, it has become a farce.

So when Jewish wire services report that  “He [Foreign Minister Lieberman] believes Israel’s diplomatic work on the eve of the General Assembly vote led to fitting results” and that “Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon has confirmed that there is a “silent understanding” with the US that it would not let the Security Council endorse such a resolution” – what can one say? That the whole idea of the “United Nations” and “Human Rights” has been turned into a theatre of the absurd? That the UN should replace symbolic decorations like Picasso’s “Guernica” with George Orwell’s “Some are more equal than others” (as a kind of  “mission statement” endorsed by the US) engraved in stone?

Former US ambassador to the UN,  John Bolton, a diplomat who seldom hid behind “diplomatic language”, used to call the UN “an instrument of US foreign policy and nothing else”. His point was proven in a spectacular fashion during the last “Anti-Racism Conference in Geneva, when USrael staged a brilliant PR-event to further demonize and isolate Iran because “the new Hitler” Ahmadinejad had the audacity to talk about Zionism (as a form of racism) and its links to the new forms of colonialism (better known as “globalisation”). Since then the hyped “nuclear threat” to the world, allegedly coming from Iran is the latest attempt to divert attention from the real culprits.

Of course the display of  “outrage” by the Israeli ambassador and his US-“echo” after the endorsement of the  Goldstone report on Gaza,  was yet another attempt to reframe the debate. Let the people forget the clear evidence of Israel’s guilt: If it (the government) has nothing to hide

  • Why did it prevent foreign reporters from entering Gaza?
  • Why did it refuse to cooperate with the UN fact-finding mission? (Refusing even to let Goldstone enter Gaza through Israel, so he had to enter via Egypt)
  • Why did it also treat former UN-envoys with disrespect (not to say contempt)i.e. Richard Falk?
  • Why did it even belittle and debase  the testimony from IDF soldiers ( “Breaking the Silence”)?
  • Why does it always try to get rid of justified criticism by “character assassination”? (claiming its supposedly “superior moral standing” as proof of honesty while accusing opponents of despicable motives, (anti-semitism) or having no right “to teach us about morals…” (the “Zionist” argument par excellence)

One has to concede that, if countries like Saudi Arabia show consternation about human rights violations by Israel, it is appropriate to say “ Mind your own business”. At the same time we all know, that without the great “friendship” of the US, Saudi princes would sleep less soundly. In fact, without US-support many undemocratic and repressive regimes would not have come to power or stayed in power (see for example Mubarak in Egypt)  in the first place.

However, on the other hand, there have been several genuine peace initiatives from the Arab states but all have been rejected by Israel on some pretext. Peace is the last thing, the Zionist government wants. The whole identity of Israel ( “a military with a government”) is based on “defense”, on eternal victimhood, on being a lone island of “European civilization” among the “primitive Arabs” and Jew haters, who want to “drive us into the sea”… Pathetic as it sounds, it still works in the media ….

noEU_320And Europe? What about the “community based on values” as the EU has sought to present itself by adopting the Declaration of Human Rights as part of the Lisbon treaty (formerly called  “constitution”)?

The puppets in Eastern Europe voted against the resolution (… divide and conquer does work …) , but the biggest assholes are GERMANY, ITALY AND THE NETHERLANDS. Germany sells heavily subsidized submarines to Israel and the EU has awarded  Israel a “privileged” trade status …

Professor Avi Shlaim also touched on the subject in his article:

“America and the European Union shamelessly joined Israel in ostracising and demonising the Hamas government and in trying to bring it down by withholding tax revenues and foreign aid. A surreal situation thus developed – where a significant part of the international community imposed economic sanctions not against the occupier but against the occupied, not against the oppressor but against the oppressed.”

This “surreal” picture became even worse when the tendency to decouple the EU’s economic preferential treatment from Israel’s terrible human rights record became clearly visible:

The Czech Republic, which held the European presidency until 30 June, made no secret of its desire to see closer ties and more exchange between the EU and Israel. The outgoing Czech prime minister, Mirek Topolanek, made this clear in an interview with the Tel Aviv daily Haaretz on 26 April in which he said that “the peace process mustn’t be linked to EU-Israeli relations.

In doing so, he was reacting to the view expressed by Benita Ferrero-Waldner, EU commissioner for external relations and European neighbourhood policy. She said: “We believe that good relations with Israel are essential…” (Why?)

While other media sources fell victim to the diplomatic waffle and reported that according to a Senior European diplomat “people are saying there should be a pause in close ties between Israel and the union.”

What breathtaking hypocrisy. While the Norwegian doctor Mads Gilbert described the horrible injuries and deaths he saw in the  Shifa  hospital in Gaza as “scenes from Dante’s inferno” the EU talks about “a pause” in the close relations to Israel. It is like saying “I know, on top of all the other human rights violations, Israel is bombing an overcrowded ghetto right now and hundreds of people are going to be terribly wounded or killed, so what? Let’s just wait till the furor has died down and then we’ll continue with business as usual …”

As LMD reported, The General Affairs and External Relations Council brushed aside the parliamentarians’ concerns [about human rights violations in Gaza] and after France took over the EU presidency at the end of 2008, …. the council expressed its determination to strengthen its links with Israel from April 2009:

“In accordance with the political commitment made on 16 June 2008 at the 8th Association Council meeting between the European Union and Israel, the Council reaffirms its determination to upgrade the level and intensity of its bilateral relations with Israel within the context of the adoption of the new instrument which will replace the current Action Plan from April 2009. That building-up must be based on the shared values of both parties, and particularly on democracy, respect for human rights, the rule of law and fundamental freedoms, good governance and international humanitarian law.”

In the past the European parliament repeatedly tried to call for the suspension of its association agreement with the Israelis (.. when Israeli atrocities received a short media spotlight ..). but the council always undermined these calls for accountability. Even the “diplomatic” (read: alrady hypocritical) rhetoric now shows what all the great talks about “European values” is really worth: The original text stated that “Relations between the Parties, as well as all the provisions of the Agreement itself, shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles, which guides their internal and international policy and constitutes an essential element of this Agreement but the latest update (see above) says “it must be based on the shared values of both parties, ..particularly on democracy, respect for human rights ..”, etc.

This is of course totally meaningless. To say in this context that something “must be based on …” is simply a euphemism for saying “it should be based on. It is like the Sunday sermon of a priest, it sounds rather noble, but the people who wrote it,  never expect it to really happen.  In a world where the categorical imperative would rule, moral behaviour would be the norm. (It still is for most ordinary people, I daresay but the profit cult  makes it harder every day …) but in a world based on “might is right”, rules have to be enforced by sanctions and these must be applicable to all parties.

boycott-israel-anim2Will Europe be forever sucking up to the “gangster state” (see Avi Shlaim) Israel because they have excelled at exploiting Holocaust guilt? The perpetrators of unspeakable Nazi crimes are dead. The Holocaust is over. But the crimes against the Palestinians go on and on so we have a moral responsibility to stop them and demand accountability from Israel.

The Eurpean Union has no moral  authority whatsoever. It is a Trojan horse for corporate interests, the financial, neo-feudal, extractive “aristocracy” and the cult of the market. It destroys national sovereignity and undermines democratic decision-making (see the case of Ireland: Voting “No” against a treaty – is not applicable), it pushes for the militarization of Europe  while posing as a “community of values”.

A “European” version of a foreign minister has no democratic legitimacy at all and heaven help us, if it is going to be Tony Bliar ….

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized